Skip to main content

Full text of "Principia : or, Basis of social science ..."

See other formats













Second Edition, Crown 8vo., Cloth, Price, $2.00. 

Published by J, B, LIPPINCOTT & CO,, 

and '717 Market Street, Philadelphia. 

The following notices of this work are selected from a larger 
number that might be offered. 

The Philadelphia u PUBLIC LED 
GER" says, 

" A work which is the result of an 
evidently long and patient study of 
Comte's, Carey's, Paley's, Spencer's, 
Mulford's, Mill's, Guizot's, and Fou 
rier's writings on cognate subjects, 
although it differs essentially in 
method and matter from all of them." 

The Philadelphia "EVENING BUL 
LETIN" says, 

* * * " It is evidently a work of 
immense labor, and of a good deal 
of originality. But to give any idea 
of its character would be difficult in 
a newspaper notice, and we content 
ourselves with calling attention to it 
as a work that deserves examination 
by all those who take an interest in 
that very capacious and comprehen 
sive branch of modern philosophy 
which goes by the name of social 

cer, Mulford, J. S. Mill, and Fourier, 
but is also the first of a series." 

Der deutsche "PHILADELPHIA DEM- 

OKRAT" sagt, 

tl Dies Werk ist in seiner Art eine 
No vita t in der Literatur der Social- 
Wissenchaft. * * * Der Verfasser 
sagt, dass man bisher die Social- 
Wissenchaft, obgleich sie in ihrem 
innersten Wesen ' Moral' sei, aus- 
schliesslich den l Unglaubigen' und 
den Socialisten liberlassen habe 5 
dass er dagegen sein national-b'kono- 
misches Werk im Interesse der offen- 
barten und uberlieferten Religion 
verfasst, es aber nichts destoweniger 
von einem liberalen und progres- 
siven Standpunkt aus geschrieben 
habe. Die Quellen aus denen er am 
Meisten geschopf't, und die Autoren, 
deren Werke" [ausser den oben- 
genannten,] "ervorzuchsweise seiner 
Arbeit zu Grunde gelegt, fiihrt er in 
der nachstehenden Reihenfolge auf, 
namlich : die Bibel, Appletpns' En- 
cyclopadie, Wheaton, Ruskin, Ten- 
nison, Guizot, De Tocqueville, F. 

/~* ci i i ; _ . -l TlT^i/^l^^U. . 

The Philadelphia " PRESS" says, 

il WQ cannot begin to give even the 
briefest summary of a book which 
not only differs in many points from 
Comte, Carey, Paley, Herbert Spen- 1 Cooper, Schleiermacher, Me' Cosh: 


und NordhofFs Monographic der 
Communisten Gemeinden in den Yer. 

' Wenn auch von unentschieden 
religiosen, und zwar christlichen 
Standpunkt aus gesehrieben, halt 
sich das Werk doch ganzlich frei 
von Mysticismus, und es gipfelt das 
System des Verfassers folgerichtig 
in Communismus ; allerdings nicht 
in dem von Cabot, und noch weniger 
in dem der Pariser ' Commune,' son- 
dern in einem durch ' Religion' und 
'Moral' limitirten Communismus. 

" Obwohl der Verfasser schwerlich 
National-Oekonornen zu seiner neuen 
Lehre bekehren wird, so ist sein 
Werk immerhin interessant und ver- 
dient gelesen zu werden." 


" This work is in its manner a 
novelty in the literature of Social 
Science. The author says that until 
now Social Science, although moral 
in its inmost nature, has been left 
* * * to the infidels and Socialists ; 
but that he, on the contrary, has 
composed his national-economical 
work in the interest of revealed and 
traditional religion, but that, never 
theless, he has written it from a 
liberal and progressive standpoint. 
The sources from which he has de 
rived most, and the authors whose 
works he has principally used as a 
basis for his labor" [in a'ddition to 
those above mentioned,] "he gives 
in the following order, * * * namely, 
the Bible, Appleton's Encyclopedia, 
Wheaton, Ruskin, Tennyson, Guizot, 
De Tocqueville, J. F. Cooper, Schlei- 
ermacher, Mc'Cosh ; and NordhofTs 
Monograph of the Communistic so 
cieties of the United States. 

" Though the work has been writ 
ten from an undetermined" [or un 
denominational] " religious, and, 
certainly Christian standpoint, yet 
it remains entirely free from mysti 
cism ; and it logically crowns the 
system of the author with Commun 
ism ; to be sure not with the Com 
munism of Cabot, and still less with 
that of the Paris Commune, but with 
a Communism limited by Religion 
ai:d Morality. 

" Though the author will scarcely 
convert National-Economists to his 
new doctrine, yet his work is never 
theless interesting and deserves to 
be read." 

The Philadelphia " CHRISTIAN IN 
STRUCTOR" says, 

" This large and well-published 
work is evidently the result of much 
thought and labor on the part of the 
author. It is an earnest discussion 
of the whole subject of Social 
Science, and while in many of his 
views he is of the school of Cornte, 
Fourier, Spencer, John S. Mill and 
the like, he stands on far higher and 
better ground every way, and gives 
one of the most instructive and in 
viting presentations of the subject, 
and one of the least exceptionable 
that has probably been laid before 
the public. In preparing it he says 
his earnest desire was to contribute 
his mite towards theChristianization 
of politics, the promotion of real 
freedom and progress, and the im 
provement of society. * * * While 
however we say all this, we think 
the book is one of the best of the 
kind, and may well be read by any 
who are interested in the subject of 
which it treats." 

The ''PRESBYTERIAN" of Philadel 
phia says, 

" This is a weighty book, not easily 
read, and not easy satisfactorily to 
notice. The writer believes in the 
possibility of a ' Social Science,' but 
differs in many respects from Comte, 
Spencer, and other writers on the 
subject. He believes in the scien 
tific value cf Ethics, Metaphysics, 
and Religion, which Comte declined 
to consider parts of Positive Science. 
He also believes in communism, but 
not in a vulgar communism, but 
communism placed on the basis of 
Christian kindness and benevolence. 
* * * The sayings of Jesus on the 
mount and other of his discourses, 
the writer thinks applicable only to 
a Christian Commune, and in his 
ideal commune, all these principles 
are to be predominant." 
adelphia says, 

"Principia or Basis of Social 


Science. By Robert J. Wright of 
Tac my. This volume, which bears 
the imprint of Messrs. J. B. Lippin- 
cott and Co., has the following dedi 
cation : ' To the memory of my dear 
departed sister, Josephine Amanda 
Wright : by whose sell-sacrifice, unto 
death, I was enabled to survive, and 
to work, and to produce these and 
other writings: this work is affec 
tionately and reverently dedicated 
by her living monument R. J. W.' 

" The author reviews the works of 
Comte, Carey, Paley, Spencer, Mul- 
ford, Mill, Guizot, Fourier, and 
others. He gives his object in pub 
lishing this volume as follows." 
I Then follows page vn from the book 


GAZETTE'' says, 

" We have received a copy of the 
above interesting work. A hasty 
glance over its neatly-printed pages, 
reveals many new and perhaps 
strange doctrinal points to us, but 
are nevertheless based upon reason 
able grounds, and are indicative of 
the daep study and research of the 
author. The lalter has subdivided 
his work into five sections or books, 
to wit: I. Summary Introduction to 
Social Science ; II. The Precinct , 
III. The Nation; IV. Corporation; 
V. Limited Communism. There, is 
much in its pages to interest the 
theorist, and we therefore ask for the 
reading of the book, in order that its 
true merits may be known. " 

PROF. GEORGE ALLEN, of the Univer 
sity of Pennsylvania, at Philadel 
phia, says, 

* * * u I was hardly less surprised 
than gratified, by the presentation of 
your remarkable work. Your book 
so attractive in its table of contents, 
and obviously upon the merest in 
spection, so original in its treatment 
of each topic, * * * has attracted me 
* * * powerfully. * * * I have been 
able to gratify my eager curiosity only 
in part. I hope to do better for my 
self soon. In the meanwhile allow 
me to express my gratification at the 
prominence you give to your firm 
and full belie*f in Revelation, and at 
the fairness and liberality with which 

you speak of religious organizations 
not your own * * *." 
REV. D. C. MILLETT. D.D., of Phila 
delphia, says, 

" I have not read it through as yet, 
but have gone far enough to appre- 
c : ate its value, and hope some time 
to talk it over with you in propria 

REV. D. S. MILLER, D.D., of Phila 
delphia, says, 

li I am glad to hear of you as still 
engaged in study and speculation 
upon great themes. * * * I do not 
doubt it to be the fruit of earnest la 
bor and thought ; and the affection 
ate dedication of it to the memory 
of your dear departed sister, and my 
friend, is very grateful to me." 
adelphia, says, 

li I have derived a great deal of 
informal -n from your book." 
REV. Z. M. HUMPHREY, D.D., of Phil 
adelphia, says, 

" It bears the marks of most care 
ful preparation, and I have no doubt 
that it will prove of great value. *** 
A more leisurely examination of 
the work may call out a more ma 
ture expression of opinion as to its 

REV. ABEL C. THOMAS, of Philadel 
phia, says, 

" I hope to read your disquisition 
with both eyes open. Confessedly 
it will require close attention in the 

MRS. M. L. THOMAS, of Philadel 
phia, says, 

"Allow me to express the great 
interest I have found in reading your 
Principia. * * * Your views of the 
great problems of human and divine 
government are broad and many- 
sided, and such as mark the profound 
scholar and the earnest thinker. 
Hoping that the \vorld you are striv 
ing to enlighten may yet enter into 
a comprehension of the eternal prin 
ciples of truth as you present them, 
I am," &c. 

delphia, says, 

" I thank you very sincerely for 
the beautiful book. * * * I have not 


yet read it, but hope soon to do so ; 
and will then transfer it to a public 
library which I have established at 
Chestnut Hill, where it will be pre 
served safely." 


Philadelphia, says, 
"I * * ~ ;: ' shall take pleasure in its 
perusal and judging from a glance 
at its contents, doubt not that it vrill 
a-7ord much valuable information." 
D. W. SELLERS, ESQ., of Philadel 
phia, says, 

* * * " from the reading of which 
during the coming fall I anticipate 
pleasure and instruction." 

JOHN B. COLAHAN, ESQ., of Phila 
delphia, says, 

* * * " from the perusal of which 
I expect to derive much information 
on the subjects treated ; * * * a val 
uable addition doubtless to the 
sources of knowledge." 

delphia, says, 

"I am very much obliged to you 
for the tender of your book on social 
science. * * * My best acknowledg 
ments for your courtesy. With the 
greatest respect," &c. 
WM. F. GUERNSEY, M.D., of Phila 
delphia, says, 

" I am pleased with your views 
arguments and conclusions. All is 
free from censure or egotism. I wish 
it might be read by all. You have 
my thanks for the volume : and 
thanks for your labors in producing 
so valuable a work." 
H. J. DOUCET, M.D., of Philadel 
phia, says, 

" Allow me to congratulate you on 
the completion of your great under 
taking-: hoping that your health and 
life may be preserved so that you 
may be able to fulfil the promise * * * 
I shall take the liberty at some fu 
ture day to make some criticisms." 
R. PATTERSON, ESQ., of Philadelphia, 

" I am sincerely thankful for your 
sending me your work on Social Sci 
ence, which I doubt not I shall read 
with deep interest. Already I have 
concluded a study of the special di 
vision of ' Limited Communism,' 

which I find full of suggestions and 
originality in treatment." 

M. W. WOODWARD, ESQ., of Phila 
delphia, says, 

II The dedication of it affords me 
a very gratified remembrance of your 
lovely but not forgotten sister." 

CHARLES SANTEE, ESQ., of Philadel 
phia, says, 

II 1 doubt not it will amply repay 
for all the time necessary to become 
fully acquainted with its contents. 
Tho dedication of it to your departed 
sister has revived my recollection of 
her faithful labors * * *." 

ELLIS CLARK, ESQ., of Philadelphia, 

" I promise myself great pleasure 
in a more thorough perusal." 
The Pittsburgh "CHRISTIAN ADVO 
CATE" says, 

* * * go far as we know, the au 
thor of the present volume is the 
only man who has pretended to con 
sider this science from a distinctively 
Christian point of view. As the 
Positivists have hitherto given it the 
most attention, it has received a skep 
tical turn. The author calls special 
notice to his point of view. His vol 
ume, the first of a series relating to 
Social Science, contains five books, 
entitled respectively, Introduction, 
Precinct, Nat'on, Corporation, Lim 
ited Communism. In it he has writ 
ten for the people rather than for 
philosophers, and has adopted a style 
at once simple, direct and forcible. 
There is little in it that an ordinarily 
intelligent reader will not under 
stand, and must understand before 
he can see the causes of the compli 
cations and corruptions of our politi 
cal and social life." 
The Pittsburgh " PRESBYTERIAN 
BANNER" says, 

"This is an elaborate work, evi 
dently prepared by one earnestly 
anxious to instruct his fellow-men 
and do good to them. He grapples 
with the most complicated problems 
in social and political life, and sets 
forth the remedy for many of our 
present ills in a life which he himself 
admits to be an ideal one. Much of 
the reasoning is sound," * * * 


WM. E. BARBER, ESQ., Westchester, 
Pa., says^ 

* * * il I have been impressed by 
the perspicuity and systematic ar 
rangement of its contents, and the 
originality of your views upon the 
topics discussed, and I am satisfied 
that you have opened up veins of 
thought which are fraught with re 
sults of the highest importance to 
the well-being of society. * * * I 
earnestly trust that you will be 
spared to continue your thoughtful 
investigations * * *." 

Shore , Pa., says, 

* * * " Your elaborate work on 
Social Science * * * I feel gratified 
as the result of my examination, to 
be able to commend your work 
highly. It must have cost you much 
time and labor; and the department 
of science which it handles, being 
comparatively new and undeveloped 
must have rendered your task all the 
more arduous. But you seem to 
have accomplished your undertaking 
thoroughly and well." 

REV. A. A. LIVERMORE, D.D., Pres. 

Meadville Theological School, Pa., 


* " Your learned and elaborate 
work Principia. * * * I am sure by 
a look at its table of contents that 
it will repay a careful examination." 
PROF. J. H. DILLINGHAM, of Haver- 
ford College, Pa., says, 

" I much regret the long delay ap 
parent in sending thee the acknowl 
edgment of the receipt of thy very 
interesting work. * * * I hope soon 
to obtain time to read the work, con 
nected as it is with my own depart 
ment of instruction." 
REV. W. F. P. NOBLE, Chester Co., 
Pa., says, 

" I hasten to acknowledge your 
noble book, * * * You thinkers 
should publish minutes, like eccle 
siastics, telling where you can be 

ette College, Easton, Pa., says, 

* * " I am glad to find so much 
that points to a higher relationship 
of the subject than I have seen in 
the works of other writers on Social 

Science. I shall have occasion to 
return to it when I have more lei 

Mathematics Lafayette College, 

* * * "A beautiful volume. Prin 
cipia,' bearing your name so mod 
estly on the title-page * * *. Dr. 
Green and I were each touched by 
the Dedication. You are to be con 
gratulated on the serviceable com 
pletion of so solid a piece of labor." 

The "NEW YORK WORLD" says, 
" The author of this remarkably 
original treatise informs us in his 
preface that among the * * * effects 
of the great rebellion was the turn 
ing of his attention to politics, and 
the stimulation of his ambition to 
promote the Christianization thereof 
by producing ' a volume that could 
safely be recommended to pious 
young men.' He differs from Comte 
in holding that ' metaphysics, ethics 
and religion' are branches of a really 
' positive philosophy ;' from Carey, 
in subordinating mercantile or finan 
cial to metaphysical considerations, 
and in foreseeing dire consequences 
from the increasing price of land 
and the approaching over-population 
of the world; Paley, whilst com 
mendable for writing in the interests 
of revealed religion, fails to give 
sufficient weight to moral instincts ; 
Spencer thinks too much of secular 
science and not enough of religion ; 
Mill ' takes too much the commer 
cial view of everything,' and is l too 
essentially English 5' Fourier alone 
takes a wide enough scope, and even 
he has adopted an ideal ' too high 
for the common world, and too low 
for the higher life.' Above physi 
cists and statesmen, as teachers of 
social science, are placed theologians, 
and next to theologians are ranked 
the various sorts of communists. ** * 
His ideal is * * * Christian commu 
nism in incomes, labors and general 
life, doing to others perfectly as we 
would be done by. * * * Human 
society is divided into six component 
units individual, family, social cir 
cle, precinct, nation, and mankind ; 
* * * nations should be split up into 



very small precincts, each of which 
should have the utmost internal 
liberty and self-government, only 
being restrained by a praeterpluper- 
fect national government from tres 
passing on the equal liberty of other 
precincts. Law and war are to be 
replaced by arbitration and moral 
suasion ; * * * and certain plentiful 
commodities adopted as the media of 
exchange. All these and many other 
details are elaborated with an infi 
nite amount of philosophical argu 


" J. B. Lippincott & Co., Phila 
delphia, have just issued a valuable 
work, entitled ' Principia ; or Basis 
of Social Science.' * * * The author 
has spent several years of profound 
thought in the preparation of this 
work, patiently investigating kin 
dred subjects by such writers as 
Comte, Carey, Paley, Spencer, Mul- 
ford, Mill, Guizot, and Fourier, and 
showing wherein he differs from 

York, says, 

(l On page 19 we are told that 
1 Social Science maybe defined to be 
the Philosophy of Politics -, 1 and on 
page 20, that ' The science of society 
is the science of the dispensations of 
Providence.' Then on page 22 we 
are asked to ' observe the rank and 
grade of social science among the 
four most general sciences, namely: 
Theology ,Metaphy sics, Sociology and 
Mathematics.' We regret that Mr. 
Wright has not furnished a classi 
fication of the sciences ; but he com 
plains of want of space. * * t He 
hopes ' that if the public cannot 
tolerate these writings as a work of 
science, they will, at any rate, toler 
ate them as a kind of sermons to 
politicians and statesmen/ So mote 
it be." 

New York, says, 

I * # * h^ t have time in the 
course of my vacation to look into 
it. * * * I hope to receive instruc 
tion from your book, and am grate 
fully yours," &c. 



il You have grappled with the most 
interesting of all subjects, collected 
most valuable facts, and made close 
research into recondite principles. 
* * * I believe that the best grade 
of German scholars would appreciate 
your work as well as, if not better 
than any English ones. * * * It 
would translate well." 

E. STEIGER, ESQ., New York, says, 

" It is encouraging to see that the 
momentous questions treated in your 
book have still sufficient attractions 
for superior minds in these material 
days. I trust that the great labor 
you have undergone in writing the 
work will be duly appreciated by 
the select and discriminating public 
for whose information it was writ 


" Social Science is yet in its in 
fancy, and he who fosters it into 
maturity, or searches out its essential 
principia underlying the multiplicity 
of defective social systems, and brings 
them to the front, for foundation 
stones' on which the ideal social 
. system of nature and reason and 
revelation may be reared, will ever 
be remembered with gratitude by 
society, and handed down to suc 
ceeding generations as society's 
greatest benefactor. * * * 

" Not however for this renown 
does the author of the elaborate work 
before us seem to have written. His 
Principia is the offspring of higher 
motives. * * * Each book is appro 
priately divided into chapters and 
sections, thus taking up every dis 
tinct theme in a separate chapter and 
section, so as to afford easy reference 
as a text-book on social science. * * * 
Upon the whole, the author has 
given to the public a book on social 
science that will be to society a 
strong push in the right direction." 
mira, N. Y., says, 

* * * "is not mistaken in suppos 
ing me to be specially interested in 
such lines of thought and observa 
tion. From a reading of the first 


35 or 40 pp. I perceive already that I 
you and I have many things in com- j 
mon. My only hesitation is based j 
on what may be called the inertia 
of ignorance. When you and other 
thinkers have solved the problem of 
a perfect social order, you will then 
have come only to where Jesus Christ 
was Eighteen Hundred years ago, 
* * * I assure you of my thanks * * * 
for a work of such scope and Chris 
tian wisdom." 

Christian Biblical Institute, Stan- 
fordville, N. Y., says, 

* * * " Outwardly as well as in 
wardly I find it a beautiful book. * * * 
It is full of good thoughts worthily 
expressed. * * * Your spirit seems 
excellent every where ; and (I believe) 
your work was (from the first) an 
offering to God and man ; and so 
may man receive it, and God follow 
it with his blessing." 
Lawrenceville, N. J., says, 

" You have my sincere good wishes 

for success to a work which has cost 

you so many years of patient labor.'.' 

PROF. RyP. STEBBINS, D.D., Cornell 

University, says, 

"I shall read it during my vaca 
tion. The table of contents gives 
some very important topics." 
REV.PETERB. llEROY,Bedford,N. Y., 

11 1 was never more surprised than 
to receive your valuable book. * * * 
Jt must have been the work of your 
life. I intend, as I have time from 
my ministerial labors, to read it ; 
and the more so as coming from the 
heart and intellect of one so well 
beloved in other days." 


N. J., says, 

" I consider the subject as one of 
the highest importance. * * * If 
there are errors in treating it, still 
we are to be thankful there is strug 
gling toward the right. * * * I have 
no doubt I will be deeply interested 
in reading it." 

REV. WM. H. PITTMAN, Hopewell, 

N. /., says, 
11 It is a book of great merit, a 

valuable addition to American and 
Christian literature : it is a book that 
every minister and statesman ought 
to have. * * * Every subject and 
division is made plain." 

The Boston " ZION HERALD" says, 

u This volume * * * is a conscien 
tious and thoughtful effort to solve 
the problem of the best conditions 
for man's social well-being. The 
writer has read widely, and criticises 
without hesitation the systems of 
Comte, Spencer, Fourier, and J. S. 
Mill. He illustrates freely his own 
themes from the whole breadth of 
social science literature. The out 
come of all his thinking, large por 
tions of which are very suggestive 
and valuable. * * * The evident 
sincerity, honesty, and hearty con 
viction of the author constantly im 
presses you ; * * * the book amply 
repays the reading, by its wholesome 
suggestions upon many subordinate 
themes relating to social develop 
ment, public health and morals, in 
ternational intercourse, and the re 
moval of the great evils that now 
press upon society." 

The "BOSTON GLOBE" says, 

* * * " The author admits that 
Herbert Spencer is the King of the 
Social Scientists. * * * Fourier's 
Ideal is said to be too high lor the 
common world and too low for the 
higher life; The author considers 
that society is held together by and 
happiness in it depends upon, Love 
of the other sex, Acquaintanceship, 
Material or business interests, Edu 
cation, its interests and its literature, 
Goodness, namely, doing justice to 
others, and forbearance under injus 
tice, real or apparent. There are 
some excellent ideas in this volume. 
* * * The book is well worth read 
ing, though its advanced views will 
hardly find acceptance among prac 
tical statesmen." 


* * * " In his preface the author 
briefly compares the principal char 
acteristics of his work with those 
of Comte, Carey, Paley, Spencer, 
Mulford, Mill, Guizot and Fourier, 
stating wherein he differs from the 



theories advanced by them, and ac 
knowledges his indebtedness for en 
couragement and aid, to the Bible, 
Appletons' Cyclopedia, Wheatonj 
Kuskin, Tennyson, Guizot, De Toc- 
queville, J.F. Cooper, Schleiermacher 
and Me' Cosh, and to Ballou, Nord- 
hoff and various writers, Catholic 
and Protestant, on natural theology, 
theism, communism, and the higher 
life of the Individual Soul. * * * 
Enough has been stated to show the 
formidable nature of the task which 
the author has undertaken. To ex 
plain and illustrate his manner of 
executing it would occupy columns 
instead of paragraphs." 

The Boston" LITERARY WORLD" says, 
"A very formidable-looking vol 
ume is R. J. Wright's ' Principia ; or 
Basis of Social Science'. * * * To 
ascertain by careful perusal the char 
acter and purpose ot this work would 
be a task of no little magnitude, and 
to record one's discoveries would be 
a still greater one. We despair of 
conveying an adequate idea of the 
contents of this ponderous volume, 
and refer our readers to the book 

" The author * * * explains in his 
preface the points on which he differs 
from Comte, Carey, Paley, Spencer, 
Mulford, Mill and Fourier. The last 
named he regards as wide, rambling, 
and almost wild in his analogies and 
range of topics ; and the scope of the 
other writers is too contracted. * 
The author's purpose is to consider 
in this volume the fundamental po 
litical organic principles, which in 
succeeding volumes he will apply to 
the solution of various social and 
political problems. The work is 
plainly the product of sincere and 
laborious thought, * * * it has a cer 
tain freshness and earnestness of 
statement which will incline the 
reader to overlook its obvious faults. 
* * * His sub-divisions are numer 
ous, but well arranged and calculated 
to assist the reader." 

" Your interesting looking volume 
came yesterday. I have only time 
now to scan its table of contents a 

rich carte and I hope soon to find 
leisure to test your arguments. Ac 
cept my sincere thanks for the oppor 
tunity. These are to be the questions 
of the coming fifty years, and every 
contribution to their discussion is 
valuable, indeed, as you suggest, 
the highest duty of a citizen." 

" I am much obliged for the valu 
able gift * * * your ' Principia.' The 
perusal of the preface * * * has 
shown me that its scope and object 
are in sympathy with all that I most 
reverence in the present, or desire for 
the future. I intend to study your 
work carefully * * * what appears 
to me so well planned * * *". 
REV. ADIN BALLOU, Hopedale, Mass., 

* * # your a ble. instructive and 
valuable work. It is freighted with 
thought, knowledge and suggestion. 

* * * I have read what little I con 
veniently could of it since its receipt, 
but not enough to criticise worthily 
its manifold evolutions of data, much 
less to master its system of prin 
ciples, reasonings and conclusions." 

# * * Of a work so elaborate as 
this, written in such a spirit and 
treating of such a large subject, we 
prefer not to express a decided opin 
ion without a more careful and 
thorough examination than we have 
been able to give it. * * * This 
volume is designed to give the 'fun 
damental political organic princi 
ples.' * * * He has tried to write 
such a book that all liberal-minded 
people, whatever may be their reli 
gious or political views, may read it 
without pain or disturbance. * * * 
A book written in such a spirit and 
for such an object deserves careful 
consideration, no less than its size. 

* * * Whatever fate Mr. Wright's 
theories may meet at the hands of 
masters and competent critics in 
social science, he has certainly pro 
duced the most elaborate and high- 
reaching and thoughtful work on his 
subject that has appeared from an 
American pen. He apologizes ^for 
his style, * * * As a whole, it is a 
valuable contribution to our political 



literature, and it would be a good 
thing if others of our men of mind 
and leisure would devote themselves 
to such studies as those of Mr. 
Wright, to which we owe this 

*** "A ponderous volume. * * * 
We wish the author could have held | 
himself until cold weather the book 
is too big a job for us at the present 
state of the thermometer." 

* " Mr. Wright * * * asserts * * * 
that the progress of the human race 
in the highest aims of life, is too un 
certain of proof, to l)e made tho basis 
of a positive science. He "" * * aims 
to elevate politics from the low- 
ground which they have occupied, in 
our country especially, by pointing 
out the great truths which lie at the 
foundation of national existence.** * 
We can only sketch the outlines of 
the author's design, and call the at 
tention of thoughtful readers to his 

ton, O.j says, 

li A review of this book leads us 
to commend in it these valuable 
features : 1. The importance of the 
general subject. 2. Its numerous 
but appropriate subdivisions, em 
bracing the whole field of Social 
Science. * * * 3. The authors 
thorough, steady, patient, and com 
plete investigation of his theme. 

4. His peculiar, natural, and acquired 
talents for investigating and discuss 
ing the subject, and for reducing it 
to practical rules of Christian ethics. 

5. The evolving from the metaphys 
ical and the abstruse of his subject, 
the simplest and most practical moral 
rules in all social, civil, and religious 
relations. 6. Such an arrangement 
and relation of subjects, as well as 
that full discussion and presentation 
of all its features, as adapts the book 
to a general want, and renders it of 
great worth the book embracing 
524 pages, and no repetition. Other 
points deserve commendation, while 
in a few things only is the work open 
to criticism. * * * But, compared 
with its many points of excellence, 

these few features of criticism sink 
almost from sight." 

Contribution to " HERALD OF GOSPEL 



" The subject of which the book 
treats, * * * is at present command 
ing the attention of the most thought 
ful and studious minds of this and 
other lands. * * * Wright has evi 
dently devoted much careful and 
patient study to the investigation of 
the whole range of subjects embraced 
in his theme, and has talents which 
fit him in a peculiar manner for such 
a work. From a cursory examina 
tion of its pages, we are led to be 
lieve that this book possesses merits 
of a high order, and which should 
create for it a wide demand. * * *." 

"THE INTERIOR," Chicago, says, 
" The Principia is a voluminous 
work on an immense subject. The 
subject embraces all the relations 
existing in society, and thus covers 
the sciences of Law, Government, 
Political Economy, and Moral 
Science, with many other lines of 
thought, which lie in the field of 
Philosophy. The author pursues 
the most of these more or less per 
sistently, and always independently 
of the recognized leaders, Mill, 
Guizot, iPaley, Comte, Spencer, etc., 
and in combating all of them he 
brings out a great variety of sugges 
tions. Indeed the work under the 
author's plan of treatment became 
a kind of cyclopedia of social science. 
* * * From this it will be seen that 
the author is radical in his views 
throughout. And yet it is just this 
type of character whose work v s it is 
most interesting, and in one sense 
most profitable, to study. His de 
votion to a theory, and the earnest 
ness and zeal of his researches which 
result from that devotion, give his 
discussions the interest of novelty 
as well as originality, often giving 
the reader, by suggestion, an entirely 
new view of an old subject. The 
style is strong and compact, and the 
work will be found a good invest 
ment for the student of politics, 
law, or any of the sciences included 
under the-general subject." 



The u CHICAGO JOURNAL'' says, 

* * * it The wr iter covers a great 
deal of ground, giving a vast amount 
of valuable information. * * * It 
contains the elements of a good 

The Springfield " DAILY REPUBLI 
CAN" says, 

* * * "The quality of his culture 
may be seen from his chapter on 
theology as a prerequisite to the 
study of social science. Among his 
arguments to establish this relation 
is the statement that ' of the eminent 
men of the Christian world, a far 
larger portion of them are found to 
be the children of clergymen than 
of any other professionals ;' also the 
fact that the theologians, Ximenes, 
Wolsey, Richelieu, Cranmer and 
Talleyrand became the best and fore 
most political statesmen of the world, 
and that the statesmanship of Rome, 
although clerical, ' is acknowledged 
to be the most far-reaching in the 
world.' " 

The Chicago " TRIBUNE" says, 

* * * " The arrangement * * * of 
the contents is unique; so is the 
style : so is the punctuation. * * * 
He calls especial attention to it. The 
following sentence, the end of the 
preface, may serve as a fair example : 
'And finally, borrowing an idea from 
Paley, but revising it, we may say, 
that we cannot see why, our having 
done, however feebly, yet as well as 
we were able, a work which seemed 
to be very much needed, should 
hinder any other person from doing 
it as much better as he would choose 
to.' " 

REV. G. C. HECKMAN, D.D., Pres. 
of Hanover College, Ind., says, 
"Principia has just arrived. Many 

thanks. I will read it with great 

interest and care." 

The St. Louis u GLOBE DEMOCRAT" 


" This is an able and comprehen 
sive survey of social science, from a 
moral and theological, and yet an 
exceedingly liberal and progressive 
stand-point. * * * ] ( rYes its volu 
minous character, it is a deeply- 

philosophical dissertation, and we 
adopt the author's suggestion not to 
judge it positively until it has been 
carefully considered, * * * we are 
inclined to look upon it as a valuable 
addition to" the many valuable treat 
ises which we already have upon the 
engaging subject of social science." 
Gov. C. C. CARPENTER of Iowa, says, 

* * * ''So far as I have been able 
to examine the book, I find it origi 
nal in thought and style, and I be 
lieve it will be calculated to promote 
thought and investigation, and to 
greatly increase an intelligent com 
prehension of the special subjects 
upon which it treats. I h( pe it may 
be generally read by thinkers upon 
social questions, and that you may 
Have the pleasure of witnessing the 
results of your study and labor in 
the improvement of the social philo 
sophy and practical methods of the 

Metaphysics in Michigan Univer 
sity, says, 

* * * " I have not yet had time to 
do more than run over the table of 
contents, and here and there to open 
and look at your book. I have seen 
and read enough, however, to assure 
me that your flow is individual, and 
your discussion positive, and that 
you have made genuine contribu 
tions toward the solution of some 
of the vexed problems of Social 
Science. I shall take pleasure in 
giving the Principia a careful perusal 
during my vacation. * * * I hope 
God may give you life and health to 
complete the flood of work you have 
marked out for yourself." 

L. C. DRAPER, ESQ., Sec'y of the State 
Hist. Soc. of Wisconsin, says, 

" Our librarian has acknowledged 
the receipt of your fine volume. We 
are always glad to add such to our 

"I have the honor to inform you 
that at a meeting of the Exec. Com. 
of the State Hist. Soc. of Wisconsin 
held this day, you were unanimously 
elected a corresponding member." 
Omaha, Neb., says, 

"I think the book evinces much 



careful study and mastery of the 
problems of sociology. * * * The 
object and aim are worthy of your 
self, and should commend themselves 
to every man who lives and works 
in the Christian spirit. * * * It is a 
fine specimen of American book- 
making as regards the mechanical 
execution. It is good for tired or 
strained eyes. The dedication is 
very touching to all of us who know 
the facts." 

ANT'' says, 

* * * " Anything like a faithful and 
exhaustive notice of such a volume 
would require the space of a quar 
terly review. * * * The author, in 
his preface, has outlined our labor 
in a brief but clear dissection of its 
contents. * * * In this volume he 
gives only the fundamental political 
organic principles. He professes to 
write free from prejudice as to exist 
ing parties, and to have prepared a 
volume which can be safely recom 
mended to pious young men and stu 
dents for the ministry, who desire to 
keep abreast with the age on this 
subject. In this light especially, our 
own examination of it leads us to 
endorse the work as the most com 
pact and yet comprehensive of the 
science of which we have knowledge. 
It should find a place in the library 
of every minister who would culti 
vate enlarged views of a thinking 
period. It is most thorough in its 
treatment. * * * It is a book for 
study and reference, and a most val 
uable addition to the discussion of 
an eminently important subject." 

DIST" says, 

* * * " It is philosophical in its 
scope of thought and modes of in 
quiry, and after giving the author's 
definition of social science, endeavors 
to show its relation to other sciences, 
It proposes to carry into social sci 
ence the same wide spirit of harmony 
and generalization that Schleier- 
macher carried into theology. Re 
cognizing the Divine character and 
renovating influence of Christian 
truth, it proposes to bring its influ 
ence to bear upon the political sys 

tem of the world, and thus contribute 
by its reflex bearings to the moral 
regeneration of mankind." 


# * # u This volume is presented 
to the public in the humble, but 
earnest desire of being able to con 
tribute his mite to the Christianiza- 
tion of politics, the promotion of real 
freedom and progress and the im 
provement of society, firmly believ 
ing that the promotion of freedom 
and progress in this world is aid to 
the salvation of souls in the next 

" The author * * * offering his 
work as a mite contributed towards 
the promotion of real freedom and 
progress, and the improvement of 
society. He defines Social Science 
as the ' Philosophy of Politics,' 
and therefore specially worthy the 
thoughtful consideration of Ameri 
can citizens, to whom we therefore 
commend the work." 
England, says, 

* * * <* -\y e [ m ve three works on 
political science, none of them en 
tirely without claim to attention. 
Mr. R. J. Wright, in his Principia, 
undertakes to reconstruct not merely 
the basis of social science, but that 
of political society itself. His politi 
cal order is to be founded on the ag 
gregation of a multitude of Precincts, 

* * * with a population ranging from 
that of a village to that of a moderate- 
sized town. Each of these is to con 
stitute itself, by force of spcial affini 
ties and the attraction of like to like, 
of families in the same state of moral 
advancement, intellectual education, 
refinement, and general social char 
acter ; room is also to be made for 
societies of special tenets and ten 
dencies. * * * This is the basis 

* * * : the general construction of 
the edifice, the details of each suc 
cessive enlargement of the self-gov 
erning area and corresponding re 
duction of the powers of government, 
and the distribution of different func 
tions among the different ruling 
bodies, we must leave the reader to 
study in the volume itself." 



Eng., saijs, 

"I have to thank you for a copy 
of your Principia, etc., brought over 
by my friend Prof. Youmans. * * * 
I am glad to see a work which, 
though in some respects divergent 
from my own views, is in others co 
incident with them. All such efforts 
to diffuse larger conceptions must be 

T. W. HIGGINSON, Newport, R. L, 


" I have read with especial interest 
that portion of it relating to the 
organization of labor by association. 
* * * Your book must represent a 
great deal of study and work, and 
you deserve much credit for putting 
so much sincere labor into it, and 
carrying it out so thoroughly." 


* * * Whatever success the 
author may have attained or failed 
of, * * * he has given out no second 
hand or hackneyed views. His book 
is the fruit of long observation, care 
ful study and profound thinking. It 
abounds in reasonings which are 
original, often just and generally, 
even when obnoxious to criticism, 
highly suggestive. 

* * * The au thor shows a breadth 
and depth of view quite beyond that 
of average specialists and writers on 
it, or its different branches, in the 
importance which he assigns to 
theology, metaphysics, psychology, 
ethics, in short all the mental sci 
ences, as a needful propaedeutic for 
mastering sociology. Here he is 
toto ccelo above, as well as different 
from, Comte, and the entire school 
of positivists, sensualists and mate 
rialists. * * * Mr. Wright justly 
says : * The study of theology is the 
scientific study of religion, and, 
therefore, calls into exercise the 
higher faculties of the mind. Hence, 
it is one of the best preparations, 
for earnest original study in any of 
the sciences.' *'* * * * * 

" The above quotations will be 
found scattered, from pages 31 to 
36, inclusive, and will suffice to give 
a taste of the book, which may lead 
some to a further examination of 

it. While we highly value it, we 
dissent from some of its positions.*** 
"We regret that the foregoing 
notice, prepared for a previous num 
ber, has been, by inadvertence, de 
layed until now." 
The " INDEPENDENT," New York, 

says, < 
* " The subdivision of topics 

* * * is exceedingly minute. * * * 
Mr. Wright "regards social science 
as 'a kind of high politics.' He 
makes it so high and at the same 
time so comprehensive, as to embrace 
nearly all the other sciences. * * * 
Mr. Wright shows much reading on 
the subject of which he treats and 
large industry in collecting mate 
rials, while he is scholarly and gen 
erally lucid in his style." 

delphia, says, 

" An introduction to a new syste'm 
of philosophy, which shall be dis 
tinctively American and distinc 
tively Christian. * * * A work like 
Mr. Wright's, that is so full of care 
fully-digested information on a large 
number of important topics, can 
scarcely be perused otherwise than 
with profit. The topics discussed 

* * * are all, or nearly all, of an 
eminently practical character which 
have a bearing upon the govern 
mental problems which we are en 
deavoring to solve in this country, 
and as such they merit the attention 
of those who desire to understand 
and to perform with the best effect 
all the duties of citizenship." 

The "BANNER OF LIGHT," Boston, 


" Mr. Wright has in this large 
volume shown himself the master 
of all the schools, whose peculiari 
ties he exposes in a full and fair 
manner, desirous of nothing but 
arriving at the truth. * * * How 
faith fully he has done this can only 
be learned from a studious perusal 
of his volume, upon whose pages 
are to be seen the proofs of patient 
and well-directed thought and the 
most painstaking investigation. * * * 
To be welcomed by all such as are 
in earnest rather for the truth than 
for the support of any preconceived 



theory. The author, after all, pre 
tends to have done no more than lay 
down the principles of the science in 
this volume, but in mastering them a 
key is obtained to the whole subject." 

York, says, 

" This is the work of an author 
with whom we have not heretofore 
been acquainted which fact, how 
ever should not be construed as proof 
that he has been unknown. We 
suspect that he is somewhat of a 
solitary student, and much more 
conversant with books than with 
men. * * * In his religious philoso 
phy he seems to be of the best Chris 
tian type, and in his political phi 
losophy he is purely and. broadly 
American. * * * There need be no 
hesitation, however, to say that it 
contains a vast amount of valuable 
materials, and to the intelligent 
reader who looks beneath the sur 
face of things it will prove provoca 
tive of valuable thoughts." 


" Very many will be surprised to 
find this such a sensible work, judg 
ing it by its title. * * * The unique 
style, correctness and freshness of 
statements, make the reader lose 
sight of the mode of reasoning and 
peculiar forms of thought. * * * 
Without concurring in all the 
author's opinions, we find much in 
the work to admire, and particularly 
the high tone and conscientious effort 
to solve the problem of man's social 

town, Pa., says, 

" The work is one of advanced 
ideas, the author differing materially 
upon many points with writers upon 
kindred subjects. The vexed prob 
lems of social life are discussed so 
honestly that the reader cannot fail 
to be impressed with the writer's 
earnestness in his expressed desire 
to be able to help promote progress, 
improve society and benefit man 
kind. * * * We advise those inter 
ested in the subject to read the book 
itself, assuring them that it will well 
repay perusal." 

The " CHRISTIAN ERA," Boston, says, 
" In the fullness of its table of 
contents, * * * in the cyclopediac 
range of its topics, embracing ' high 
politics,' theology, metaphysics, 
moral philosophy, political economy, 
the science of government, the sci 
ence of physical man, and miscella 
neous topics relating to the develop 
ment and progress of the race ; in 
the minuteness of its sub-divisions, 
* in the originality of its punc 
tuation marks, * * * in the singu 
larity of its syntax, * * * this ' Prin- 
cipia' is not merely an imposing 
and curious, but a ponderous and 
unique book. As an illustration of 
a peculiar method of literary work, 
* * * it is the most extraordinary 
volume we have ever encountered." 

The "CHURCHMAN," New York, 


" At the first glance this seems an 
imposing work. The size of the 
book, the very title, and a glance at 
the table of contents, filling nearly 
twenty pages, and embracing almost 
a cyclopedia of topics, impressed us 
as only things of vastness can, and 
we prepared ourselves for solid read 
ing and close thinking. * * * We 
venture to suggest whether princi 
ples so very vague as those which 
he proposes to make the basis of 
Social Science, including theology 
and morality, can be of much use in 
preparing young men for the Min 
istry. ' High Church, Low Church, 
and no Church' are all the same to 
him. * * * As to the work itself we 
have little to say." 

delphia, says, 

"We do not feel ourselves pre 
pared to enter into any full review 
of this work. The author has made 
his subject a study, and writes ia 
the interest of religion." 

Miss E. P. PEABODY, Cambridge, 

Mass., says, 

11 The book * * * is very interest 
ing ; but I have not read it carefully 
enough to speak of it worthily. * * * 
A gentleman friend of mine has your 
volume now STUDYING it. * * * He 
says it is very interesting." 



JOHN JORDAN, JR., ESQ., /or the His 
torical Society of Pa., says, 
11 1 ain directed by the Society to 
communicate to you their thanks 

* * * for Principia. * * * We gladly 
welcome * * * this exceedingly in 
teresting work as an acquisition to 
our collection. * * * We will be 
happy to receive your visits here." 

REV. J. F. GARRISON, Camden, N. J., 


11 The subject is one of supreme 
importance. * * * It concerns the 
church even more than the state. 

* * * One statement gives me much 
assurance of a satisfactory discus 
sion ; and that is your purpose to 
make use of metaphysical consider 
ations in settling your principia * * * 
the right point of view from which 
to approach the whole subject.'" 
WM. WELSH, ESQ., Philada., says, 

"Mr. Wright will please accept 
my acknowledgments of his kind re 
membrance of his old neighbor."*' 55 '* 

" On the receipt of your Prin 
cipia I hoped to get time to study it 

REV. T. J. SHEPHERD, D.D., Phila., 

" I thank you very heartily for 
the volume, and I should be glad, 
when leisure offers, to read it. * * * 
I will be happy to see you and to 
express my acknowledgments in 

T. W. WORRELL, ESQ., Frankford, 
Pa., says, 

il I anticipate great pleasure as 
well as profit in the reading/' 
JOSEPH MOORE, Pres. Earlliam Col., 
Richmond, Ind., says, 

* * * " A book which from what 
I have observed thus far, promises 
to be of great value in my profes 
sion (teaching)." 

E. F. STEWART, ESQ., Easton, Pa., 

11 You seem to have taken a broader 
and more philosophical view of the 
subject than any of your predeces 
sors or compeers." 
REV. J. P. WATSON, Troy, O., says, 

" I am truly grateful to you, and 
have, so far, much enjoyed its exam 

REV. J. E. NASSAU, D.D., Warsaw, 
N. Y., says, 

" A handsome volume, a sort of 
thesaurus on Social Science. * * * 
I am glad to see that the Alumni of 
Lafayette are making their mark in 
the literary and scientific world, as 
well as in other avenues of useful 

REV. 0. 0. WRIGHT, Fall River, 
Mass., says, 

li I have been studying it carefully, 
that I might tell you what it is to 
me. I find a deep interest and 
much profit in it. * * * I feel that 
it is calculated to do great good." 
REV. J. D. NORMANDIE, Portsmouth, 
N. H., says, 

11 1 shall read it with much inter 
est as soon as I can." 

The "INQUIRER," London, England, 


" Writers on Sociology * * * may 
be and frequently are very able and 
accomplished men, like the author 
of this volume. * * * Although * * * 
perplexed * * * we have yet formed 
a high opinion of the author as an 
earnest and sincere thinker, ani 
mated by a generous desire to correct 
some of the miseries and evils of the 
social state under the existing forms 
of civilization. * * * The author 
seems to have bestowed an immense 
deal of labor on his work; * * * 
but we doubt much if any one 
knows or can know, within the com 
pass of earthly life, all the elements 
not even all the fundamental ones 
that belong to * * * human so 
ciety. * * * As for their number 
they are just as likely to be six hun 
dred as six. These inner mysteries 
of human nature may be sneered at 
by practical men as ' airy nothings,' 
but without them none of the so- 
called facts of life would have ' a 
local habitation and a name.' 
Our author * * * does not invest 
his ideal communities with couleur 
de rose and an atmosphere all bless 
edness and joy. * * * Society needs 
change, and society will have it in 
time. * * * We hope such of our 
readers as are interested in the sci 
ence of Sociology will look into this 















Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1875, by 

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. 




(Tins loth is mftttxonaiclg anb SRcbmntln $pebitaitb 


R. J. W. 


FIRST. In presenting a new work on any subject, it seems 
proper that the writer should commence his preface to it, by 
pointing out wherein his work differs from, or is called for by, 
the characteristics of other and abler works, already in the same 
field. Therefore we will briefly compare the principal charac 
teristics of ours, with such works. 

From Comte we differ ; First. In adding metaphysics to his 
merely physical sciences, and in maintaining the idea, that meta 
physics, ethics, and religion, are branches of a really " positive 
philosophy." Second. By denying that the progress of the 
human race in the highest aims of life, is anything like so well 
proved in history, as to be made the basis of a "Positive Science." 

From Carey we differ; First. In making much more use 
of metaphysical considerations, and less, of merely mercantile or 
financial ones. "Second. In believing that the price of land is in 
creasing with fearful rapidity, and bringing evils on earth, as yet 
but little anticipated. Third. In admitting that the population 
of the world is approaching, and will approach, a density that 
will puzzle social science, morality, and religion, to provide 
against the evils thereof. Fourth. Mr. Carey has too much 
animosity, and is too bitter against England. 

From Paley we differ, chiefly ; In our estimating the moral 
instincts, as on a PAR with reasonings from expediency : and in 
regard to views arising from the differences between monarchy 
and democracy ; and about the pre-eminent value of the British 
Constitution. But we agree with him particularly, in that our 
work, like his, is written avowedly in the interests of revealed 
or traditionary religion. 

As to Spencer; we admit he is the King of the Social Scien 
tists ; but think, First, that unless by his metaphysical argu 
mentation, he does not differ from Comte so much as he appears 


to think he does : except that Comte was avowedly atheistic, but 
Mr. Spencer is rather deistic. Mr. Spencer seems to work chiefly 
in the interests of secular science ; but we work chiefly in the 
interests of religion, and of scientific statesmanship. And our 
work differs so much from his, in ideas, conclusions, methods, 
classifications, and spirit, that we can only refer the reader to 
the whole course of the works, respectively. 

From Mulford we differ, chiefly; In objecting to the pre 
dominance which he gives to the rights of Nation, over all the 
other Elements of humanity, and of social science ; and object, 
that his work has a less wide scope than either Fourier's, Comte's, 
Spencer's, or Mill's. 

With regard to J. S. Mill; He is a valuable writer, and we 
often quote from him, as confirmatory proof, but he does not 
allow enough for the demands of human feeling ; besides, he 
takes too much of the commercial view of everything. Further 
more; Mill is too essentially English, and European, in the 
plans which he proposes, and in those which he opposes ; and 
in the arguments which he adduces. 

Guizofs " History of European Civilization" is a first class 
work, and has been well abridged ; but its scope is only his 
torical, and European ; and its form is not scientific, but rather 

None of these writers, except Fourier, takes a wide enough 
scope. Comte and Spencer omit the true moral and theological 
bearings. Paley omits the Physico-Scientific. 

As to Fourier ; He is so wide in his analogies, and range of 
topics, as to be almost wild in those respects. Besides, his IDEAL 
is too high for the common world, and too low for the higher life ; 
and requires a larger number of persons for a single " phalanx," 
than can easily be obtained for such experiments. 

SECOND. The authors or works to whom this writer is most 
indebted for encouragement and aid ; besides those above men 
tioned, are, the Bible ; Appleton's Cyclopaedia ; Wheaton, Rus- 
kin, Tennyson, Guyot, De Tocqueville, F. Cooper, Schleier- 
macher, and M'Cosh ; also to Ballou, Nordhoff, " The Circular" 
and other writers on Communism, and to the various works on 
Natural Theology, Theism, etc.; and to various writers, Catho 
lic and Protestant, on the higher life of the Individual-soul. 


And besides this general acknowledgment, the endeavor has 
been made all along, to give the authorities and exact quota 
tions, in their respective places. A general acknowledgment is 
also due here, to a host of American historians, statesmen, and 
commentators on the Constitution of the United States, whom 
he has read and heard and admired from early boyhood. 

THIRD. The writer's own aims in, and view of this volume, 
may be stated as follows : Politics, which, previous to the Great 
Rebellion, he had considered as, in this country, but little more 
than party squabbles for place, and for words, rose up before 
him, after the war, as the object to which he desired to devote 
some of his best time and thought. And this volume is a part 
of the results. It is one of a series, taking a survey of the sub 
ject from the moral and theological, yet liberal and progressive 
stand-point. The series has been several years under thought, 
and in preparation. And this volume gives only the fundamen 
tal political organic principles. The writer's scientific thoughts 
are generally arranged as arguments for one and another of his 
proposed ideals. Because an ideal is a theory. And, "not to 
have an ideal higher than ourselves/ 7 or than our common insti 
tutions, is to let ourselves and our institutions go downwards by 
the gravitating force of inherent evils. Yet he has endeavored 
to write in such a spirit, and to produce such a volume, that 
all liberal-minded and liberal- hearted persons, might read it, 
without pain or disturbance; either to their religious convic 
tions, whether high-church, low-church, or no church : or to 
their political feelings, whether Democrats, Republicans, or what 
ever else they might be : and furthermore, a volume that could 
safely be recommended to pious young men, especially to stu 
dents for the ministry, who really desired to be useful, and to be 
abreast of their age, on this subject. In that spirit he presents 
the volume to the public, in the humble but earnest desire, of 
being able to contribute his mite, towards the Christianization of 
politics, the promotion of real freedom and progress, and the 
improvement of society : firmly believing, that the promotion of 
freedom and progress in this world, is aid to salvation of souls 
in the next world. 

Its method of discussion aims ,to be, by reverting constantly 
to general fundamental principles, instead of to the passions or 

yiii PREFACE. 

prejudices of the day, or age, or country. It endeavors to see 
the inside of its subjects impartially, and to harmonize contend 
ing truths ; and on new, and American principles. It attempts 
to carry into Social Science and Politics, the same wide spirit 
of harmony and generalization, for the sake of conciliation, that 
Schleiermacher so successfully carried into Theology. 
' The work will sometimes have occasion to censure the faults 
and sins of governments, of our own, as also of others. And 
like all other rebukes to wrongs and evils, the more opposi 
tion the censures meet, or the less welcome their reception is, 
the more it would prove that they were really needed : At any 
rate, the work is published from a sense of duty to God : and 
bearing in mind Froebel's words, "come let us live for our 

FOURTH. As to the title, we call it " Principia or Basis of 
Social Science," as referring, not to our treatment of the subject ; 
but to the five great heads or topics here treated, and to their 
.superior and more general relation to the several other topics, 
which we propose to publish at some future time, in other 
volumes, with other titles. Therefore, this volume needed some 
appropriate title appended to the term Social Science, to dis 
tinguish it from them. And, should the remaining volumes 
of this series be published, they will be less abstract, and more 
immediately practicable, than this one. 

FIFTH. As to the Form and Style. The form of the book, 
and of its Divisions and Sub-Divisions, has merely grown up 
gradually out of the subject, and of the author's method of 
studying it, namely, first analytically and inductively, and 
afterwards synthetically and deductively. 

As to the Style. The endeavor has been, to make it intelligible 
and unequivocal, to thoughtful readers with a tolerably fair Eng 
lish education, who are without much technical knowledge on the 
subjects treated. But still it seems true, that a study which ranges 
through most of the sciences, culling the gems, and extracting the 
essence, from many of them, cannot be fully understood, until 
after acquiring something, both of the general knowledge, and 
of the general discipline of mind, that are acquired by those 
studies. Moreover, for instance, Primers, or even early school- 
books of any science, cannot be produced until after the principles 



of the science become pretty well established ; so that then many 
preparatory arguments may be dispensed with. To make a 
work on this subject intelligible to all, would therefore be, to 
make it, either, so primer-like, or so prolonged and diffuse, as to 
cut it off from the sympathies and attentions of those who, in 
reality, were most likely to study it. As to such matters, and in 
the present early condition of Social Science, all works concern 
ing it, ought to be compared, not with works on Chemistry, or 
Astronomy, or even Moral Philosophy, or Political Economy ; 
but rather, with works on Geology or Metaphysics. 

For the defects of style ; and lack of thorough revision, both 
previous to, and whilst going through the press, the writer must 
beg the indulgence of the public, especially on the grounds of 
advancing years, and of much enfeebled health. 

As to the punctuation, IT is, generally, according to the au 
thor's own rules ; and he therefore relieves all other persons from 
responsibility for its general deviation from the ordinary customs 
thereof. For, in his view, punctuation should be adapted to suit 
readers, and students, rather than hurried reviewers ; and should 
principally aim to give most of the pauses for reading, and for 
making the meaning distinct and unequivocal, and, even obvious 
to the unlearned; and especially so, in abstract writings; also 
remembering that it is easier to remove punctuation marks from 
stereotyped plates, than to insert them therein. 

SIXTH. But after all, there may be deemed necessary, some 
excuse for the writer's presuming to publish his work at all, on 
such an exalted topic. 

Well : He does not pretend to class this work, as at all on a 
par with the works of the other great names already mentioned. 
He does not claim any pre-eminent ability, but only, patient study 
and laborious thought. Yet he remembers, that as Spencer him 
self says, (Westminster Review, vol. 67, page 243): "In science, 
as in life, every man, strong or weak, carries his burden but a 
little way, and then gives place to a younger." And perhaps 
this remark may apply even to the great names above mentioned, 
as well as to others, as also to his own. However, he hopes that 
his thoughts, at any rate, will at least serve as suggestions to 
others, and that they will stimulate others to produce better and 
more readable works on the subject, whilst also retaining sound- 


ness in Morals and Theology. And he hopes also, that if the 
public cannot tolerate these writings, as a work of science, they 
will, at any rate, tolerate them as a kind of sermons to politi 
cians and statesmen. And he is quite willing that no persons 
other than those who are given to these kinds of studies, or who 
desire to become so, will read his book at all. 

The concluding words of one of Mr. Wheaton's prefaces, seem 
appropriate here ; and are : " The knowledge of this science has, 
consequently, been justly regarded as of the highest importance 
to all who take an interest in political affairs. The Author 
cherishes the hope that the following attempt to illustrate it, will 
be received with indulgence, if not with favor, by those who know 
the difficulties of the undertaking." 

Accordingly, we ask critics to be indulgent, and to let the 
volume have time to be clearly understood, consistently in its 
various parts, before they extinguish it utterly. And finally ; 
borrowing an idea from Paley, but revising it, we may say, 
that, we cannot see why, our having done, however feebly, yet as 
well as we were able, a work which seemed to be very much 
needed, should hinder any other person from doing it as much 
better as he would choose to. 






Chap. I. In General 19 

Chap. II. Definition of Social Science . . 19 

Chap. III. Scope of Social Science . . .22 

1. In General. 22 

2. Locus of Intersection with the Other Sciences. 22 

Chap. IV. Uses 23 

1. Implied in its Definition and Scope . . 23 

2. Magnitude of Civil and Political Evils . 23 

3. Philosophical Basis Wanted . . . 25 

4. Improvement of Humanity consistent with 

Free-Will 26 

5. Influence on Other Sciences . . .27 

6. Summary of Uses 28 

7. Modes of Influence 29 

Chap. V. Preparatory Studies . . . .30 

1. In General ; and Methods . . . .30 

2. Theology . . _, . . . .30 

3. Metaphysics 33 

Chap. VI. Promoters and Teachers . . .34 

1. Not the Classes generally supposed . .34 

2. The Real Promoters . . . . .36 

Chap. VII. Means and Data 38 

1. Observation 38 



2. Experiment 38 

3. Modification of Expediency Doctrine . . 40 

4. Return to First Principles . . . .41 

5. Analogies of Natural Laws . . .43 

6. The Tribe-Principle 43 

7. The Type-Theory 43 

8. Ideals 46 

(a) Historical Ideals 46 

(b) Prospective Ideals 47 

9. Efficacy for Solution of Phenomena . . 48 

Chap. VIII. The Method. Analytical . . . 48 

Chap. IX. The Classifications . . . .50 

1. The Classifications in General ... 50 

2. Zoological Classifications . . . .51 

(a) Zoological, By others . . . .51 

(6) Zoological, By us 51 

3. Abstract Ungeneric Classifications . . 52 

4. Generic Classifications . . . .53 

(a) Generic, By others . . . . .53 

(6) Our Generic Classification . . . .54 

(o) Some Higher Comparisons . . . .55 

(d) Some Transcendental Analogies . . .56 

5. Our Order of Publication . . . 57 


Chap. I. Preliminary 58 

Chap. II. Most General Social Laws . . 58 

1. Differences of Degrees of Things . . 58 

2. Analogies with Physical Laws . . .60 

3. Metaphysical Operation of Social Laws . 61 

4. Condensation of General Social Laws . . 62 

Chap. III. Equilibrata of Society . . .64 

1. Spontaneous Combining Powers . . .64 

2. Spontaneous Quarreling Powers . . .66 

3. Spontaneous Reactionary Powers . .66 

4. Evils Balancing each other . . . .68 

5. Equilibrity of Sentiments . . . .69 

6. Calculus of Variations . . . .70 




Chap. IV. 

Constitution of Society 



Real Bonds of Society .... 



Tests of a Good Social Condition 



General Tests . . . . 



Tests in Morality . . . . 



Tests in Fashions 



Tests as to Labor . . . . 



Tests as to Government .... 



The Spirit, Not the Form .... 




Chap. V. 

The Doctrines of Progress. . * 



In General 




o ** 


Periods of Human Progress . * -, 



Progressions to be Homogeneous . . . 



Who the Coming Leaders will be 


Chap. VI. 

Theory of the Six Units . .. 



In General .... .,'" ... 



Origin of this Theory . . . 



Some Singular Sixes . . . . , * 



Combinations of the Six Units . .- . 



Combinations in Concatenation . ; 



Combinations in Solution . . ;-. 



Analogy in Chemistry . . . . 



Analogy in Geography 


Chap. VII. 

Balances of the Six Units . . * 



In General .... -. * 



Individual and Family as Types w . ; 



Resemblances to Gravitation . . 



Resemblances to Chemical Affinity . 



Natural History of Society . . * 


Chap. VIII. 

The Tribe-Principle . 



In General, and Classifications . 



Permanence of the Tribe-Principle 



Natural History of Tribe .... 



Mutual Relations of the Three Constituents 



Balance of the Three Constituents 






Social Circle 





(d) Precinct 103 

Chap. IX. Balances of all the Elements of So 
cial Science ...-.., 104 

1. Balances of the Analytical Seven . . 104 

(a) Law of Proportions of Power . . .104 

(b) Natural Tendency to Over-Centralization . 104 

(c) Fields of Physical and Metaphysical Power 106 

(d) Different Elements represent different Eights 106 
2. Balances of the Whole Fourteen . . 108 

(a) In General 108 

(6) Balancing Powers, to be Homogeneous . 109 

(c) Delegation of Powers . . . .110 

(d) Typicalness of the Series . . . .111 
Chap. X. Arbitration-Juries .... 112 

1. Indirect Balances in General . . .112 

2. Arbitration 112 

3. Juries in General 113 

4. Classes of Society 113 

5. Principles of the Methods. . . .115 

Chap. XL Principles of Votes 115 

1. Expression of Averages . . . .115 

2. The Ideal Ballot ..... 116 

(1) Ideal Ballot in General .... 116 

(2) Ideal Ballot for Ideas . . . .118 
Chap. XII. Principle of Currency . . . 118 
Chap. XIII. Conclusion of Introduction . . 122 





Chap. I. Preface 125 

Chap. II. Historical Statement . . .126 

1. In General History 126 

2. In United-States-History . . . .128 


Chap. III. Relatio s to the Other Elements of PAGE 

The Analytics . . . . . 131 

1. Relations to the Six Units . . .131 

2. Excess of Centralization . . . .134 

Chap. IV. Abstract and Direct Statement . 137 

1. In General 137 

2. Adaptations 138 

3. Resemblance to International Relations . 139 

Chap. V. Theory of Amalgams .... 140 

1. Description of Amalgams .... 140 

2. Argument for Amalgams .... 141 

Chap. VI. Comparison with"States"under the 

Constitution of the United States 142 

1. The Most Obvious Points . . . . 142 

(a) In General .142 

(b) Inter-Precinct Affairs . . . .143 

(c) Affairs within the Precinct itself . . 146 

(d) Temporary Restrictions . . . .147 
2. Points of the Comparison, Needing further 

Illustration . . . . . .148 

(a) Commerce and the Legal Tender . .148 

(b) Divorce 149 

(c) Punishment of Crime . . . .152 

(d) Division of Precincts . . . .152 

(e) Rebellion of Precincts . . . .153 
(/) Separation of National from Precinct Politics 155 

Chap. VII. Statement and Determination of the 

Size of Precincts .... 156 
1. Conditions in General . . . .156 
2. Conditions of Population .... 158 
3. Conditions of Locality . . . .159 


Chap. I. Preface .161 

1. Classification of Theories . . . .161 
2. Limits of the Special or Collateral Argu 
ments .... 162 



Chap. II. The Geographical Argument . . 163 

1. Forms of the Continents . . . .163 

2. Geographical Course of Civilization . .165 

Chap. III. Analogies with Physical Nature . 167 

1. Variety in God's Creation . . .167 

2. From Homogeneity to Heterogeneity . .168 

3. Concentration, versus Diffusion, of Power . 170 

4. Sociological Experiment . . . .171 

Chap. IY. Objects and Uses of "Law" . . 172 

1. In General 172 

2. Multitude and Minutiae of Affairs . .174 

3. Competition in Government . . .176 

Chap. V. Political Objects and Uses . . 176 

1. In General 176 

2. Corruption 177 

3. Specialties 177 

Chap. VI. Human Happiness .... 179 

1. In General 179 

2. Individual Liberty 180 

Chap. VII. Human Nature 181 

Chap. VIII. Morality and Religion . . .182 

1. In General 182 

2. Unity of Local Enterprises . . .183 

3. Persecution 185 

4. Scripture-Type, in the Hebrew Nation . 187 

Chap. IX. Tribe-Relations 187 

1. In General 187 

2. Relations to Social Circle . . . .188 

3. Relations to Races, Species, and Breeds . 190 

Chap. X. Special Objections Answered . . 192 

1. Intermingling, Useful in the Past . .192 

2. Danger of Secession 194 

3. Confederacy, or Nation? . . . .197 

4. Objections from the Scriptures . . .198 

Chap. XI. Mining Districts . . . .199 

Chap. XII. Special Relations to "States" and 

Large Cities 199 

1. Federative Corporations . . . .199 

(a) Classifications 199 


(6) Rights of Precincts to form into Federative PAaE 

Corporations 201 

(c) Temporary Uses of " States" . . . 203 
2. Cities equivalent to States, in Eights and 

Responsibilities ..... 203 
3. Special Needs in Large Cities . . .207 

(a) In General 207 

(6) Residences and Occupations, too far Apart 209 

(c) Growth of Cities, too Rapid for Social Science 210 

(d) Plan of treating "Fallen" Districts . .212 



Chap. I. In General 214 

Chap. II. By Charters from the Nation . . 215 
Chap. III. By Charters from a "State'?: Pre 
liminary Suggestions . . . 216 
Chap. IV. The Constitution of the United 
States, as a formal Basis for a 
"State" . . . . . . 217 

1. In General . . . . . .217 

2. Exceptions 217 

Chap. V. Simple and Direct Form of Charter 

from a State . 219 





Chap. I. Preliminaries 220 

Chap. II. Rights of the Nation, in Relation 

to th.e Other Elements . . .223 

1. Rights in General 223 

2. Duties of Progress 229 

3. Rights in Relation to Mankind . . .234 


Chap. III. Eights in Relation to Confedera- PAGE 

tions 236 

1. Right to form Confederations . . . 236 

2. Uses of Confederations . . . .239 

Chap. IY. Contiguity, Physical and Metaphys 
ical . . . . . . .241 

Chap. Y. Definition of Nation . . .242 

Chap. VI. Rebellions 247 

Chap. VII. Birth and Size of Nations . . 248 

1. In General 248 

2. Conditions of Population and of Politics . 250 

3. Conditions of Locality .... 251 

4. Applications to the United States . .251 

5. Provisions for Peaceful Subdivision . . 253 


Chap. I. Preliminaries of International Law 255 

1. Classifications 255 

2. Foundations 259 

3. Sources 262 

Chap. II. Most General International Laws . 265 

1. Leagues 265 

2. Treaties 265 

3. Eminent Domain 269 

4. Arbitration ,. 271 

5. Naturalization (Indicated) . . . .271 

6. Forms . 272 

Chap. III. Affairs in Peace 272 

1. Property in General 272 

2. The "Tariff" ...'.. 273 

3. The " Person/' in General . . .273 

4. Specialties in Marriage and Divorce . . 275 

5. Transgressors 277 

Chap. IV. Affairs in War 280 

1. In General 280 

2. Relations to the Individuals of the Bel 
ligerent Nations 281 

3. Ways and Means of War .... 285 


4. The Rights of Neutrals according to Local- PAGK 
ities . . . . . .288 

(a) In General 288 

(6) Affairs in the Locality of a Neutral . . 291 

(c) Affairs in Common Localities . . . 293 

Chap. V. Conclusion of International Law . 297 



Chap. I. Classifications . . . . 297 

Chap. II. Collective Naturalization . . 298 

Chap. III. Individual Naturalization . . 300 

1. The Rights of the Individual . . .300 

2. The Rights of the Renounced Nation . . 301 

3. The Rights of the Adoptive Nation . . 308 

4. Personal Conditions . . . . .308 

(a) In General 308 

(b) As to Preventing Errors . . . . 308 

(c) As to Proving or Producing Fitness . . 308 



Chap. (A) Preface to Corporation . . . 311 




T 1 N S. 

Chap. I. Anticipations by Facts . . . 313 

1. In Religion and Morals . . . .313 

2. In Politics and Parties . . . .315 

3. In Education 317 

4. In Trade .318 

5. Cosmopolitan and Migratory . . . 319 



Chap. II. Anticipations'by Writers . . 321 
1. The Ancients, and the Idealists . . .321 
2. The Modern Scientists . ... 322 

(a) Spencer p. 322. (6) Guyot p. 324. 

(c) Mill p. 324. (d) Carey p. 325. 

(e) Comte p. 325. (/) Ballou p. 326. 

(g) Blanchard p. 328. (A) French School 

p. 329. 


Chap. I. Statement of Position . . . 330 

Chap. II. Rights in General . . . .331 

Chap. III. Rights of Naturalness . . .333 

Chap. IV. Right of Individual Selection . 334 

Chap. V. Rights of Conscience . . . 334 



Chap. I. Advantages Common to Precinct 

and Corporation . . . 336 

1. In General 336 

2. Recapitulation from the Precinct . . 336 
3. Power to Resist the oppressive and central 
izing tendencies of Modern Society . 338 
Chap. II. AdvantagesPeculiar toCorporation 339 
1. Analogies in Biology .... 339 

2. Prevention of War 340 

3. Inconceivable for Secession . . . 341 
4. Self-Counteractions Inherent in all Volun 
tary Combinations 341 

5. Necessary Harmony of all the Parts of So 
ciety 342 

6. Culture of the Individual .... 342 
7. The " De-facto" Argument . . .343 
8. Classes most Needing Separate Political 

Corporations 345 

9. Comparison with Individuals, as Officials . 346 





Chap. I. In General 347 

Chap. II. Abstract Arguments .... 348 

1. Ill-success of Local-governments, in other ' 

Businesses . . .... . 348 

2. Intermingling, Not Confusion . . . 349 

3. Ruskin's Specimen of Methods . . . 350 

Chap. III. Analogous Complexities Successful 351 

1. Analogy with Philadelphia .... 351 

2. Analogy with the Roman Church . . 352 

Chap. IV. Conclusion of Practicability . . 355 





Chap. I. Preface 356 

Chap. II. Corporation an Element of Tribe . 359 

Chap. III. Logical Relations .... 360 

Chap. IV. Real Relations . . - . . . 361 

Chap. V. Differences between Corporations 

and Localities ... . . . 363 

1. In their Nature ... . . 363 

2. In their Operation 364 


Chap. I. Classifications ..... 366 
. 1. Blackstone's Classification .... 366 
2. Our Preliminaries . 367 



Chap. II. Corporations classifiable according 

to Ten Mentionable Character- PAGE 

istics 367 

(A) Classification of the Characteristics . .367 
1. As Related to "The Law" . . .369 

2. As to Secrecy 370 

3. As to Monopolization .... 371 
4. As to Relations to Personal Intercourse . 371 
5. As to the Relation of Membership, to Of 
fice in them 372 

(a) In General 372 

(b) Partnership 373 

(c) The Family . . . - . . .373 
6. As to Objects in view . . . . 375 

(a) The Physical 375 

(b) The Metaphysical 382 

7. As to their Nature : Simple or Compound . 383 

8. As to the Means they may use . . . 383 

9. As to their Relations to Locality . . 384 

(a) Corporations Not embracing and governing 

their Localities ..... 384 

(b) Corporations Embracing and Governing 

their Localities 387 

10. As to Governmental and Political Functions 388 




Chap. I. Classifications 389 

1. Analytical Table of Politico-Governmental 

Corporations 389 

Chap. II. Definition 389 

Chap. III. Governments should Select, rather 

than Create, their Corporations . 390 
Chap. IV. Promotions of Corporations . .^390 


Chap. Y. Corporations to be Progressive with PAGJS 
the Precinct 391 



Chap. I. Explanation 392 

Chap. II. Corporations for Single Functions 392 

1. In General 392 

2. For Treatment of Criminals . . . 394 

3. For Collection of Taxes . . . 396 

4. For Police-and-Military Functions . . 396 

5. For Civil-Executive Functions . . .397 

6. For Judicial Functions . . . .397 

7. For Deliberative Functions . . > 398 

Chap. III. Corporations for General Functions 399 

1. Classifications V 399 

2. Uses , 400 

3. Genesis . 400 



Chap. I. Nature of this Sub-Division . . 402 
1. Justification of the Speculative, and the 

Abstract 402 

2. Relation to the Other Elements or Parts . 405 
3. General Statement of the Theory . .406 
4. Classifications ..... . 407 

5. Methods of Political Expression . . 410 
Chap. II. First Sub-Sub-Division: Corpo 
rations based on Single Ideas . 411 
1. Specimens of the Ideas . . . .411 

2. Assumption of Fixed Localities . .412 
3. Statement; with Fixed Localities . . 413 
Chap. III. Second Sub-Sub-Division: Corpo 
rations based on a Few Chief Com 
binations of Ideas .... 414 

1. Nature of this Sub-Sub-Division . .414 


2. Probable Bases or Kinds of Classes ; namely, PA(tt 

Occupations, Moralities and Politics . 415 

(a) In General 415 

(6) Statement of their Functions . . .418 

3. Operation in " Law" .... 420 

(a) The Units to Govern the Geography . . 420 

(b) Corporations of Occupation, Not to Control 

Property Out of the Occupation . . 420 

(c) Disputed Jurisdiction . . . .421 
4. Divine Morality, the Great General of All 

the Bases 423 

(a) Comte's Generality-Principle, with a New 

Turn . . . . . . .423 

(b) Scripture-Arguments .... 424 
5. Operation in the Social Circle . . .425 
6. Application, Concrete Instances . . 427 

(a) The Churches 427 

(b) The Communities 428 


TRUSTS. 429 





Chap. I. Relation to our General Theory of 
Social Science, and to the Other 

Elements 433 

Chap. II. Classifications 437 

Chap. III. Ideals . 438 

Chap. I Y. Necessity of Limitations. . . 439 





Chap. I. Benevolence 444 

Chap. II. The Conditional Mutual Prin 
ciple 444 

Chap. III. Relation to Co-operation . . 446 
Chap. IV. Spiritual Rewards, instead of 

Worldly ones .... 446 
Chap. V. Union of high Moral and In 
tellectual Conditions. . . 448 
Chap. VI. Relation to Strict Righteous 
ness, or Perfectionism . . 450 
Chap. VII. Relation to Natural Theology . 452 
Chap. VIII. Sympathy with the general Chris 
tian Church 454 

Chap. IX. The Non-forcing, Principle . . 456 
Chap. X. Anti-war Principles . . . 456 
Chap. XL Order, Discipline and Punish 
ment ....... 457 

Chap. XII. Resort to Law, and of holding 

Political Offices . . .458 
Chap. XIII. Fellowship of Truth . . .458 

1. Confession 458 

2. Information 459 

3. Criticism 459 

Chap. XIV. Honor 459 

Chap. XV. Community-Occupations . . 460 
Chap. XVI. Religious Exercises . . . 460 
Chap. XVII. Communism of Labors and In 
comes . . . . . . 462 

1. Plan, in General . . . . . 462 

2. Directors and Government . . .465 

3. Property, Shares and Dividends . .466 

Chap. XVIII. Relations of Family and Sex . 468 

Chap. XIX. Manners and Customs . . . 470 

Chap. XX. Industry 471 

Chap. XXL The Dispositions and Sources of 

Danger 471 

Chap. XXII. The Self-Sacrifice Requisite . 472 






Chap. I. In General . . . " , . .473 

Chap. II. By Charter .473 

Chap. III. Substitutes for Explicit Charters . 474 



Chap. I. Preparatory Steps towards Mem 
bership 475 

Chap. II. Probationary Residence and Life- 
Experience 476 

Chap. III. Affirmations, Oaths and Covenants 477 
Chap. IV. Actual Initiation . . . .477 

Chap. V. Discernment of Character . . 478 
Chap. VI. Instruction Needed concerning 

Communism ..... 478 

Chap. VII. Summary of Precautions, . . . 479 


Chap. I. Choice Combinations of Virtues . 479 
1. Harmony of Kindness and Truth . .479 
2. Doing to and Expecting from Others, as 

We would They should Do, as to Us . 480 
3. Attention to Inward Character, together 

with the Outward ..'... 480 
4. Combination of Purity and Humility . 480 
5. Intellectual Appreciation and Affection, 

both Needed 480 

6. Attachment to the Spirit, and Detachment 

from the Form 481 

7. Solitude and Sociability . . . .481 



Chap. II. Disconnected Tests . . . .481 

1. Insincerity purged by Secession, in Com 
munism ...... 481 

2. Freedom from Selfish* Prejudices . . 482 
3. Virtuous Habits, Independently of seeking 

Communism 482 

4. Continual Aim for Individual-Improve 
ment in All Things . . . .482 
5. Personal Compatibility .... 482 

6. Obedience 483 

7. Contentment 483 

8. Living according to Utility . . .483 
9. Doing Unpleasant Duties .... 484 
10. Purity of Bodily Health . . . .484 
11. Applicants to Agree with the Proposed So 
ciety, more than with Any Other . . 484 
12. Tests should be Stringent in Proportion to 

Intellect of Applicant .... 484 
Chap. III. Of Special Tests . . . . . 485 
Chap. IV. Practical Simplicity Coming out of 

this Multiplicity . . . .485 




Chap. I. General Application to this Use, of 

all the Foregoing Treatise . . 487 




Chap. I. Each of the different Powers should 

have its Share of Officers . . 488 

Chap. II. Officers should be superior in the 

Special Virtues . . . .488 


Chap. III. The Government of the Officers PAOB 
should be Virtual, before it is 
Formal 488 

Chap. IV. General List of the Virtues re 
quired ...... 489 

Chap. V. Knowledge of Social Science . . 469 

Chap. VI. Officers should be talented in Se 
lecting New Members . . . 489 

Chap. VII. The Era Producing the Best Lead 
ers has Not Yet come . . . 90 




Chap. I. Teachings in Scripture . . . 491 

Chap. II. Practices in Scripture . . . 493 

Chap. III. Scriptural Limitations . . . 494 

Chap. IV. Theory of 1 Timothy chap. v. . . 496 

Chap. V. Relations to Celibacy . . . 499 

1. On General Principles .... 499 

2. On Scripture Grounds . . . .502 



Chap. I. Its Good Tendencies in general . 505 

Chap. II. Regeneration of Labor and Study . 507 

Chap. III. Practicability 509 

Chap. IV. Anticipations in History . . 511 
Chap. V. The Semi-recluse Life needed for 
the Higher Spiritual Attain 
ments 511 

Chap. .VL Need of Release for Christians, 

from Political Governments . 513 

Chap. VII. The Kinds of Persons nearly ready 514 



Chap. I. A Selection of Communes that have PA01S 
Dissolved, in the United States . 516 
Chap. II. Of Successful Communes, in Gen 
eral . 516 

Chap. III. Catholic Communities in the Uni 
ted States 517 

Chap. IV. Protestant Communities in the 
United States, without Regular 

Marriage . . .* . . . 517 
1. The German Seventh-Day Baptist Monastic 

Society. -. .: V ; Y .' 517 

2. The Shaker Societies . . . V . 518 

3. The New Harmony Society . . .519 

4. The Oneida Community . . . , 519 

Chap. V. Communities in the United States 

with Regular Marriage. , . ^ 520 

1. The Icaria Association . . . .- . 520 

2. The Bethel and Aurora Communities . 521 

3. The Zoar Separatists 7 Community . ; 521 

4. The Amana Inspirationists' Community . 522 
5. The Brocton Community . . . ..522 

6. Conclusion . . .. . . 523 





THIS article (namely " Book I.") proposes to give the theory 
of Social Science in its Universal Principles. These principles 
(or laws) of Social Science, may be divided into two sorts. One 
sort relates to the progress of the SCIENCE ; and the other sort 
relates to the movements of SOCIETY itself. Accordingly, this 
Summary Introduction is divided into two parts ; corresponding 
to those two sorts of laws. It proposes, in its first part, to con 
sider the nature and laws of Social Science as a STUDY : and 
then, in its secon ! part, endeavors to point out some of the 
fundamental and spontaneous powers and principles of society 
itself. And in this second part, the Introduction proposes to 
touch only the formulae and laws, which are too general for any 
other position in the science : because all the remainder of our 
books on this subject, will be devoted to the FURTHER elucidation 
of those objective principles of SOCIETY. But as to the laws of 
the STUDY, we shall but seldom ever refer to them again, after 
we shall have passed through the first part of this Introduction. 


focial Science may be defined to be the Philosophy of Poli 
tics. It is a kind of high-politics, and ought therefore to be in 
the front rank of the sciences for Americans ; yet, from its rela 
tion to morals and metaphysics and class prejudices, it cannot 
be studied with the same degree of disregard of subjective and 
personal feelings and notions, with which other sciences may be 
pursued. In this respect it is like its kindred studies history 



and theology. Hence, more than in any other study, the animus 
of the writer must be borne in mind, and be duly allowed for. 
Social Science is moral in its very nature ; although hitherto it 
seems to have been abandoned to the " infidels" and the socialists. 

The fundamental conception of Comte's work, after eliminating 
its atheism, is a conception at once not only of the highest gen 
eralization, but also of deepest insight. It is the conception that 
Social Science comes in place of an obsolete ecclesiastical and 
metaphysical positive theology, and tends to produce a new 
intellectual hierarchy. This conception arises from the insight, 
that just as Social Science is now practically the most general 
and the most all-embracing of the sciences, including even 
theology and religion itself; so, in the preceding ages, theology 
had been the i ost general of them all. Hence it was, that it 
had absorbed the greatest and best minds of the Middle Ages : 
and hence too it was, that the churchmen of those days were 
the greatest statesmen, and that the statesmen of the Roman 
Chur !) are seldom surpassed, even at this late day. And our 
Bolingbroke calls religion "The First Philosophy," which is 
true in more senses than he meant it. 

But in assenting to Comte's assertion, that Social Science 
comes in place of an obsolete metaphysical theology, we are to 
be understood, as only referring to their functions in the or 
ganization of church and of state; but not at all as referring to 
their functions in the contemplation of religion by the Individual. 

The science of society is the science of the dispensations of 
Providence. Because, so far as Providence is only general, and 
is fulfilled by regular laws, and in the order of cause and effect, 
so far it must be fulfilled by the progress and laws of society, as 
much as it is fulfilled in this life at all. This is the same thing 
in effect, as to say that Sociology is the study of the laws of 
Providence. All history and all Social Science abound with 
facts illustrative of this idea. And yet, most religious people 
seem to think, that Providence will take care of things so well 
that there is no se for Social Science ; yet one of the very ways 
whereby Providence docs take care of things, is by the teaching 
of examples. And these examples, it is the specia' business of 
Social Science to study and to classify. And some religionists 
even fling the insinuation against Social Scientists, that they are 


trying to " help God govern the world." But the same objec 
tion lies equally strong, against the followers of every science 
which has for its direct object to benefit man; and especially 
against doctors of medicine. And the objection lies much 
stronger against theologians and churchmen, that THEY are 
trying to help God govern the world. Yet St. Paul expressly 
says, "We are laborers together with God." (1 Cor. iii. 9, and 
2 Cor. vi. 1.) And the fact is, that everybody, so far as he uses 
his faculties aright, helps God govern the world. And the 
only pity is, that religionists do not study divine Providence 
better ; so that they would help God more, to govern the world. 
If we turn now to practical applications, we will find that 
Social Science runs nearly parallel to Christianity, and often 
coincides with it. On this subject we will quote from Wendell 
Phillips, who will surely be held free from the charge of par 
tiality towards religion. And observe, that what he says of the 
Church is equally true of the State ; and THAT is the applica 
tion we desire the reader to make, all through the quotation. 

In his speech before the Free Religious Association, May 28, 
1868, he says, "The records of Christianity hold, it seems to 
me, a very large measure of the lessons that Social Science 
needs. In the first place, the Christian records are principles ; 
but the church is an alleviative. It approaches evils to alle 
viate them, not to cure them. THAT is not the New Testament 
method. There are two -ways of touching evils. If the gas 
was escaping in this room we should open the ventilators and 
relieve ourselves. That is relief. To-morrow, the superintend 
ent would send for a gas-fitter, and he would stop the leak. 
That is cure. Now, as I look at it, all action of the church 
approaches poverty to make it comfortable : it approaches crime 
to endeavor to soften it : it approaches prostitution, to shield it 
from temptation. That is relief. That is opening the windows 
to get rid of the leaking gas. But Social Science and the re 
ligious philosophy of the New Testament, while they attempt 
all that, prescribe that the really religious intellect should seek 
not relief, but cure." 

Indeed, Social Science and Christianity run parallel to each 
other, most of their length : Social Science doing for society, in 
most things, what Christianity is doing for the individual. 



1. In General. 

Now observe the rank and grade of Social Science among 
the four most general sciences ; namely, Theology, Metaphysics, 
Sociology, and Mathematics, (Moral Science being here regarded 
as composed of elements or extracts, partly from Theology, and 
partly from Metaphysics ;) and observe also, that their general- 
ness is in the order above named, and that we only claim for 
our science, a position as third in this order of generality. But 
we have not space to enlarge upon this comparison. 

2. Locus of intersection with the other sciences. 

We are now to consider the locus, that is to say, the principal 
points or properties, of the intersection of Social Science with the 
other sciences that are most nearly connected with it. We may 
consider criminal law, civil law, constitutional law, and inter 
national law, as separate parts of one general science, under the 
name of the Law. Then we may consider Political Economy as 
the science of producing and distributing property, or rather, as 
the science of industry. Then, by taking these two sciences to 
gether, namely the Law and Political Economy, we have the sub 
stance of Political Science. But, inasmuch as Political Science 
looks too much to polity, and to the present, it becomes necessary 
to consider the Philosophy of History, and thus, to perfect the 
politician into a statesman, by introducing the experience of the 
past. Now the Philosophy of History becomes the " History 
of Civilization," only when we assume a continual progress of 
civilization in all the past ; and as this is a somewhat disputed 
question, the Philosophy of History is to be preferred as em 
bracing the others. 

But the statesmen produced by all the sciences just mentioned, 
have their ideas limited too closely to the facts and changes that 
are occurring in the present, or that actually have occurred in 
the past, but without any philosophical conception of the rad 
ical changes that might occur. Their solutions and remedies are 
consequently too special, and have no scientific or absolute ex 
pressions or formulae. Now the business of Social Science is, 
to investigate the changes of society by general principles, and 
to hold the results in general formulae, of which all past and 
present facts are only particular instances. 


Then it happens that statesmen sometimes find that morality 
and doing right are a safer guide than the highest wisdom 
of experience; and sometimes they would prefer to do right, 
whether it was expedient or not, as far as they can see. Here 
then, it becomes necessary to appeal to Moral Philosophy ; but 
we consider Moral Philosophy only in the light of a combina 
tion of parts selected from Theology and Metaphysics. In 
considering formulae so very general as they then become, Meta 
physics is applied to also, because it treats of the most important 
laws of the very beings who constitute society. By this time 
the formulae have become so very general, that the common 
classifications of historical facts become of less importance. Re 
sort is then had for analogies to all the sciences, from Gravita 
tion up to Zoology. The most general laws of universal nature 
are then found to be applicable. 

In this respect, Social Science acts much like Natural The 
ology. It ranges through all the sciences, culling the general 
principles of each, digesting and assimilating them to itself. 
And while it omits not any one of the sciences, from the lowest 
to the highest ; it nevertheless finds most of its nutriment in the 
higher ones, such as Zoology, Anatomy, Physiology, Instinct, 
Metaphysics, and Morals. And so wide is its range, that it 
touches all the sciences which earnest men think and feel about, 
in their deepest and most serious moments. 


1 . Implied in its Definition and Scope. 

Many of the uses are so plainly implied in its definition and 
scope, that they need not be repeated now, having been suffi 
ciently touched above. 

2. Magnitude of Oivil and Political Evils. 

Nowhere are the intentions of men so often and so utterly 
frustrated, as in legislation. Here truly, " things are not what 
they seem." In this country, laws intended to preserve morality, 
to shut taverns on Sunday, or to close bawdy houses, gener 
ally have as their main result, the causing bribes to be paid to 
policemen or other officials. Laws intended to limit the power 
of corporations, end with putting bribes into the pockets of the 
leaders of the legislature, or else of the judges. Laws intended 


to help a weak company, only help its directors to help themselves 
at the expense of the community. Laws intended to prevent 
gambling, only drive the gambling into commerce, and so, cor 
rupt the channels of ordinary trade. Laws to compel specie 
payments, only shut up the banks altogether. Laws intended 
to befriend renters at the expense of owners, only drive honest 
and cautious men out of the business of renting entirely, and 
increase the competition among, and the risks to be paid by, the 
renters. Laws to oppress any class of people, first drive them 
to deception, and next drive them out of your jurisdiction, and 
next tend to raise up friends for the oppressed. Even fashion, 
intended originally to separate the great from the little, tends 
instead, to produce unusual extravagance, and finally becomes 
the mark of disreputableness. Customs intended to secure honest 
men, become only traps to catch the simple, or barricades to 
shield rogues. 

The THEORY of politics and of trade and of the public press, is, 
OPEN knowledge or open market, and competition, and gradual 
changes : the PRACTICE of politics and trade is, false news, secret 
combinations, and sudden revolutions. Hence it is necessary, 
as Spencer says, to enquire, not only what is to be done, but also 
how to do it. A man intending to reach the moon, might rup 
ture himself, and he would still reach his aim sooner than some 
legislators or leaders will reach their objects, by the means they 
are using : and the same will apply to some of the philosophers, 
and their proposed "laws" And although most of these re 
marks apply more directly to statute law only, and not so plainly 
to those deeper and spontaneous social laws, which work, both 
over and under and within and without government, yet in 
their spirit and principle, they apply also to those deep and 
spontaneous social laws. Thus there arises the necessity and 
ihe use of a true SCIENCE on the subject. 

And then furthermore, our politicians and statesmen need 
such an enlarged scope of ideas as will set them to guarding 
against COMING evils, rather than to be forever providing 
against antiquated and worn-out ones. It is the misfortune of 
some peoples and of some governments, to be always guarding 
and fortifying themselves against old dangers, and in fear of a 
return of exploded errors. They are forever making constitu- 


tions and laws, to protect themselves from those evils which the 
progress of society, or its new form of government, has already 
rendered impossible ; but yet, working in the midst of a verbiage 
of literality and legality and of cares and fears about " the worn- 
out" they are neglecting to see or provide for the very evils 
that are surrounding them, and it may be, even sapping the 
foundation of their rights, liberties, and happiness. This danger 
and evil, which is liable to befall any country, is especially the 
bane and hindrance to our own. In the midst of dangers from 
bribery by vast railway and other corporations, we provide against 
those only of individuals. In the midst of all the evils of dema- 
gogism, we are forever providing guards against monarchy. 
Governed and tyrannized over, by secret cliques of unprincipled 
and rapacious politicians, and their colleagued contractors, we 
are continually guarding against an aristocracy of birth or honest 
wealth. Endangered by the scum and dregs of vice and prison 
degradation of all the world, we are forever providing against 
aristocracy. In the midst of a tangle of laws, allowing almost 
all criminals to escape, we are always providing more guards 
for the liberty of unknown and unsettled individuals, and thus 
fostering and covering individual secrecy. 

One of the uses of Social Science, is to enable us to foresee 
great revolutions and rebellions ; and either to avert them, or 
to provide means for personal escape or relief, when we cannot 
influence or prevent them. The Saviour says, " When they 
persecute you in one city, flee ye to another/' 

3. Philosophical Basis Wanted. 

Comte truly says, " In the present stage, philosophical con 
templation and labors are more important than political action, in 
regard to social regeneration ; because a basis is the thing wanted ; 
while there is no lack of political measures, more or less pro 
visional, which preserve material order from invasion by the 
restless spirits that come forth during a season of intellectual 
anarchy. The governments are relying on corruption and on 
repressive force, while philosophers are elaborating principles ; 
and what the philosophers have to expect from wise govern 
ments is, that they will not interfere with the task while in pro 
gress, nor hereafter with the gradual application of its results." 

We may observe, how much the need of Social Science is 


shown and proved, by the mistakes and defects of the very 
men who have of late produced works on this science, including 
also Comte himself. We might mention their ignoring gener 
ally, the depth and reality of sin, and the real moral spontaneity 
of man. Also, Spencer's idea of the spontaneous evanescence of 
evil ; also Spencer's idea, that the deadly and killing spirit was 
an absolute necessity to enable mankind to clear the world of the 
noxious animals; Comte's idea, that the social feelings wisely 
enlightened, are capable of enabling man to overcome and out 
grow his own selfishness; Comte's idea of the power of physi 
ological knowledge to overcome all evils; Buckle's idea, that 
society has derived no benefit from metaphysics; Mulford's idea, 
that nation is the only politico-social unit or person ; some theo 
logians' idea, that orthodoxy or conversion is alone sufficient to 
enable men to overcome evil ; and finally, that perversion of 
morals, which assumes that because social evils are the ordinance 
of Providence, therefore the effort to do away with them is con 
trary to Providence. 

Social Science is passing through, or must yet pass through, 
its period of criticism, even as the other sciences do. Just as 
Comte has shown, that the critical "r&^me" in civilization and 
in social affairs, must necessarily only be transient and prepara 
tory ; so (to turn the tables upon him) we say, that the criticism 
and rejection of religion from science, will be found to be only 
a temporary and preparatory stage, although perhaps a neces 
sary one; but that afterwards the critics will criticise away their 
criticisms, and so, God be restored to nature and to science, 
more fully and more truly than ever. 

4. Improvement of Humanity consistent with free-will. 

There is in the minds of many persons, a lurking doubt of 
the use of Social Science ; on the assumption, that the general 
course of human events is a fixed destiny. But to this we an 
swer: the same objection might be made to the use of means, in 
many other matters of which w r e may believe the end to be 
fixed. And a still better answer is, that the objection is an 
unjustifiable inference from the facts adduced by it. It alleges 
the uniformity of certain very general facts found in statistical 
tables, such as that the number of deaths per year, on the aver 
age, is the same in different years, by each particular disease, 


and by suicide, and even by suicide in each particular occupa 
tion. But these facts only prove the doctrine of chances ; the 
law of our BELIEF, but NOT the CAUSATION of events. And 
according to the doctrine of infinity ; of an infinite number of 
really free acts, all will not go one way; for the larger the num 
ber of really free acts, the stronger is the certainty of our belief 
that their diversities will be exactly in proportion to their abso 
lute freedom in each particular case. But this universality does 
not introduce any new element of power. 

However, true knowledge lessens the power of, and hence 
lessens the freedom of evil. Thus Social Science benefits 
mankind by lessening the temptations, and by bettering the 

We affirm that the improvement of humanity is consistent 
with free will. Temptation is a probationary and a proportional 
power. We set it down as a certain moral truth, that the greater 
the temptation to which Mankind are exposed, the greater will 
be the sainthood of those who overcome, but the fewer will be 
the number of the persons who do overcome; and vice versa. 
Even suppose that Social Scientists may not expect to make 
people religiously better, or even morally better, considered as 
to their heart or intention ; yet they expect, by lessening the 
powers of temptation around people, to make them ACTUALLY 
both better and happier. For we all know that man is to some 

extent the creature of circumstances. 


5. Influence on Other Sciences. 

Another use of Social Science is, that it brings improvements 
in all the various sciences, even in Mathematics ; and this it 
does by their reciprocal influences, and from the very general- 
ness of Social Science. This, Comte points out theoretically, 
and also illustrates it by his own example frequently, in point 
ing out improvements in the other sciences, evidently suggested 
by this one. Thus the study itself is most thoroughly made up 
of wisdom and progress. 

When we consider the great elements of human progress, 
how indissolubly they are found to be connected with one an 
other ; we find that one will bring on another, as Comte remarks 
in regard to the relations of truth and beauty, that while in 
the lower stages of civilization, the fine arts lead to intellectual 


culture, so in a higher stage of civilization, intellectual culture 
seeks at least its recreation in the fine arts. Thus, of insepa 
rable elements, either one may be cause, and the other effect ; so 
then, Theology and Social Science are related together so insep 
arably, that it may be hoped that in the future, Social Science 
will lead men back to Theology. 

Comte himself, in his latter days, avows a Deity to be the 
ultimate compound and integration of humanity ; and the 
doctrine of Deity, to be a necessary result of Sociology; thus 
showing, both by his experience and his theory, the intimate 
connection between Social Science and Theology. 

Comte also teaches, that Social Science, in turn exerts a vastly 
improving power on the natural and biological sciences ; so also 
we may hope it will, in turn, exercise a greatly improving influ 
ence on Theology itself, which is a pre-eminent branch of the 
Highest Biology ! 

6. Summary of Uses. 

In general we may say, the use of Social Science is to point 
out how really to benefit mankind by law and voluntary benev 
olence, instead of by merely well-intentioned but vain and actu 
ally injurious attempts ; to point out the natural rights and duties 
of all, and how really to accomplish them. The pursuit of Social 
Science would always be found to furnish " new themes to the 
Protestant clergy," and to all other clergies, and to all kinds of 
moral improvers. It would tend to the promotion of virtue 
and health, the prolongation of life, and to the general morality 
and happiness of mankind. 

The sum of all the uses of Social .Science is, that without its 
aid morality itself cannot prevail permanently among mankind. 
Accordingly, Comte (Pos. Phil. p. 787) says, "A universal senti 
ment of duty can prevail only through the culture of the most gen 
eral ideas, and thr ugh the rule of the spirit of generality " But 
observe, that the spirit of generality found only in Social Sci 
ence, is just a new name for the prevalence of a morality founded 
on universal utilities, that is, a spiritual morality ; as the spirit 
(in Metaphysics) is necessary to the prevalence of theoretical 
Theology. Again, Comte truly says, "The Theological sanc 
tions of morality have become inefficient on the popular mind ; 
yet morality itself, expressing as it does the feelings of human- 


ity, craves, or is ready to receive, some other sanctions ; and in 
cultivated civilization especially, is ready to receive intellectual 
sanction, that is, will welcome Social Science as the best sub 
stitute for metaphysical Theology." 

7. Modes of Influence. 

Social Science in its application to the improvement of society, 
operates in two ways ; one, by improving and enlightening the 
men who lead society ; and the other, by enlightening contenting 
and keeping in order, the mass of the Individuals of which 
society consists, so that the natural laws of society's life have 
opportunity to develop and produce their results. And the 
science teaches all men more and more, the impotence of man in 
self-will, and the necessity of all to wait on Nature more rever 
ently and patiently. 

Furthermore, the improvement of the science aifords the 
means for improving society itself, just as the improvement of 
any science, prepares the way for the improvement of all the 
arts that depend upon it. 

Here it might be asked whether the influences of this science 
can ever become practically and politically available in a Repub 
lican government, especially in this country ? We answer : the 
general knowledge which Social Science requires, (it being that 
science which takes only the general elements of all the sciences) 
shows most readily to the general public, the real learning and 
the mental discipline of the study, and of its successful students. 
Moreover, the great principles of each of the sciences can be 
made very plain to the popular mind, according as one person 
or another has natural aptitude for each of the particular studies 
to which the general ideas belong. And by selecting and grasp 
ing several or all of these general ideas only, a Sociologist may 
be comprehended and appreciated by the masses, and exert an 
influence for good, even if the people were not able to compre 
hend his plan or theories AS A WHOLE. And the fact is, the 
GENERAL elements of the sciences are just the ones that are 
easiest remembered, and are the most beautiful, and the most 
interesting to the common people. So that the minds duly 
trained to perceive and select such elements, will be the minds 
well trained and well adapted to interest people generally, and 
thus exercise such influences as would be permanent. 


1. In General; and Methods. 

Much has been said as to WHICH are the most suitable studies. 
But the inquiry, HOW the student should pursue the preparatory 
studies, is quite as important as what ones they are in particular. 
The first and most striking peculiarity is, that the student must 
bestow his attention, not on the usual, but on the most unusual 
facts or phenomena in each science. Thus, monstrosities, as well 
as extraordinary excellencies, are to be studied. Hence it is 
necessary for the Social Scientist to consider such subjects as 
sudden conversion, war, and the arts and tricks of speculators, 
and of professional politicians; also such peoples as Quakers, 
Pitcairn Islanders, also soldiers, sailors, and others, whose mode 
of life is very unusual, also the, successful communities, including 
many Catholic and a few Protestant ones ; also the various in 
formal corporations of trades, guilds, rebels, school-boys, profes 
sional criminals, and so on. Furthermore, it is very desirable 
that the methods should be pointed out by which the sciences 
have progressed, and the kind of 'circumstantial evidence, and 
succession of hypothesis after hypothesis, continually hedging 
the certainty within narrower limits, without ever obtaining 
mathematically absolute certainty. For, even in the higher 
branches of mathematics, in the transcendental functions and in 
the Calculus, it is not the a priori demonstration that satisfies 
the mind ; but the fact that the results and formulae following- 
from the hypothesis, solve all the questions, and in all the appli 
cations to which they can be put, especially those Avhose results 
were previously known. 

In the selection, then, of the sciences which should be pre 
paratory to Social Science, one principle of the selection should 
be to choose those that will most readily allow or encourage their 
being pursued in the analytical methods ; approximating, as 
closely as is convenient, the actual processes of relevant thoughts 
that really produced the results as we have them. 

Of Mathematics nothing need be said, because it is the dis 
cipline and transcendental form or type for all the sciences. 
2. Theology. 

We observe here, that the study of Theology, by any person 
who is open to conviction, and is anxious to judge impartially 


for himself, and who is also anxious for his soul's salvation, is 
peculiarly analytic, and presents in each one's own mind a his 
tory peculiarly his own. And often that history is a life-long 
history, reaching to what is deepest in human nature, drawing 
out its capacity and sincerity to the utmost, and furnishing a dis 
cipline peculiarly excellent for enabling the mind to judge of 
the recondite truths of human and divine activities. Such a 
study of Theology now-a-days, bears the same relation to other 
studies, as the study of Theology itself, in the days when the 
student's life depended on his opinions, bears to its common 
study now. 

The study of Theology is the scientific study of religion, and 
therefore calls into exercise all the higher faculties of the mind. 
Hence it is one of the best preparations for earnest original 
study in any of the sciences. The success of the German and 
Scotch metaphysicians is chiefly owing to this cause. And even 
of the pre-eminent mathematical arid physical scientists, Can- 
dolle's statistics show, as to the professions of their sires, that 
Protestant clergymen are more numerous than any other profes 
sion. And of the eminent men of the Christian world, a far 
larger portion of them are found to be the children of clergy 
men than of any other professionals. 

The peculiar fitness of the studies of the Theologians, as dis 
cipline and preparation for Political Philosophy, is further proved 
by the fact that at various times they have become the best and 
foremost political statesmen of the world. Ximenes, Woolsey, 
Richelieu, Cranmer, Talleyrand, and others may be mentioned. 
And then also the fact, that the statesmanship of Rome, which 
is conducted entirely by clergymen, is acknowledged to be the 
most far-reaching in the world. Remember also those old 
Puritan statesmen of CromwelFs day, who knew their Bibles 
and catechisms even better than their laws, how readily they 
were turned into generals and statesmen whom all the world 
wondered at, and who out-generaled and out-witted even the 
Romans themselves. 

Furthermore, both Fourier's and Herbert Spencer's writings 
show that they have been well disciplined with Theology, and 
particularly with its relation to Metaphysics. And Fourier 
spent the last hours of his life on his knees, voluntarily alone 


with God. And even Comte's ideal social power, is only a 
grand paraphrase of the church as a free spiritual power, in 
somewhat that general way that we may for instance speak of, 
the church of the United States. But the fact is, that the 
church, or some outgrowth from it, although perhaps not always 
under the name church, has generally been found in advance of 
the state, even in mere forms of government. For the church is 
typical of all human society, and produces the foremost corpo 
rations. Dr. Craig suggests to me to say, that Theology includes 
the study of " the kingdom of heaven's aims and struggles, to 
issue finally in the perfect social state." 

But when we speak in favor of Theology as a scientific and 
theoretical preparation for Social Science, we must not by any 
means be understood as if saying, that statesmen practically 
ought to be selected from among clergymen. The experience 
of the Middle Ages, culminating in the Inquisition, is against the 
selection of governors, with civil or coercive powers, from among 
professional Theologians. The government of the church in the 
Middle Ages, was almost the only important popular form in 
Europe ; and it therefore absorbed much of the then existing 
turbulent and ambitious educated material, which, finding itself 
shut out from civil power, concentrated in, and gave vent to 
itself in the church. 

On the other hand, in civil affairs, the modern change of form 
of government, from hereditary and aristocratic, to popular, does 
not show its highest uses in civil affairs, but in church affairs. 
And this it does by operating as an extra inducement to draw 
the most ambitious and turbulent materials of society away from 
the church into the state. Hence, under popular civil govern 
ments, the church itself is the greatest beneficiary the party 
most benefited. And hence also, the church of modern times 
is not so likely to become so cruel or bigoted in its coercions, as 
was the old church. But this is no argument for the selection 
of statesmen from clergymen. And because the evil would be 
LESS now than formerly, is not any argument why we should 
resort to the evil at all. The prevalence of fanaticism and of 
religious bigotry, in all pre-millennial times, is an unanswerable 
objection against any return, before the millennium, to such old 
methods of selection ; and so also is the reflex corruption 'thereby 


produced in churchmen and in church. And the modern prin 
ciples of the division of labor, and the very different kind of 
energies required in statesmen, from what are required in clergy 
men, are both unanswerable arguments against returning to those 
old methods. 

3. Metaphysics. 

AVe would now argue for the predominance which must be 
t-;iven to Metaphysics over some other studies, as preparations for 
Social Science. This is proved by the following reasons, which 
are cumulative. Metaphysics forms a considerable element in 
two other of the principal preparatory studies, namely, Theology 
and Moral Philosophy. It is the science of the most important 
faculty and part, of the individual creatures who make up 
human society. These Individuals themselves, each separately, 
are types of society, from which as types (as we shall hereinafter 
see) we form our most valuable judgments and arguments in 
social actions, the human Individual being one fit type of 
human society, and the laws of the Individuals therefore, being 
fit types of the laws of society. And it is the science for the 
self-criticism of the scientist himself, whereby to criticise away 
his own personal aberrations. 

Psychology itself, so far as independent of supernatural con 
siderations, is nothing more than a small branch of Metaphysics. 

The fault of the old theorists was not that they reasoned Meta 
physically; but that, having some special one-sided doctrines to 
establish, or particular feelings to gratify, they perverted Meta 
physics. And it has been found also that some of our moderns 
who use statistics and figures, can make perversions equally as 
great as the old metaphysicians did, and as difficult to over 
throw, and which sometimes indeed, cannot be overthrown at 
all, only by resorting to the metaphysical laws of our being, 
and to common sense. 

The attempt to ignore Metaphysics on grounds of physical 
philosophy, is much the same as to deny sensation to an animal, 
because not possessed by a vegetable. 

Comte's idea is, that mental science can only be pursued by 
observing the operations of the mind, and that, the moment we 
stop thinking, to observe those motions of the mind, the mo 
tions themselves must stop ; and then there would be nothing to 


observe. (See Introduction to Positive Philosophy.) But this 
doctrine entirely mistakes the mind's true course of proceeding 
in the case. The truth is, that the science of Metaphysics does 
not proceed essentially or chiefly by direct observations of the 
actions of mind, as and when they are influenced by its im 
mediate causes (external or internal) ; but it proceeds by ob 
serving the MEMORY of those states of mind afterwards. And 
therefore it can be just as correct as the memory. The simple 
question is, as to the reality and faithfulness of memory. For, 
granting this, we can afterwards write down the actual occur 
rences of our minds ; for all writing is just exactly noting down 
the facts of our mental processes, and if we will be faithful and 
write them all fairly, we then have a statement of facts as to the 
mind's operation, which we can consider and reconsider, ponder 
and analyze, to our hearts' content, the same and as fully as we 
could do with any record of any other natural or experimental 

In respect to self-consciousness, individuals are types of so 
ciety. A society, like an Individual, cannot understand itself 
by an effort of direct self-consciousness of its own characteris 
tics. It can only understand itself by observing its history; 
having previously encouraged the faithful narration and publi 
cation of that history, by interested and morally as well as 
mentally competent persons. And the better any society is, 
the more it will criticise and improve its own characteristics, by 
the light of its own experience, in defiance of its passions, its 
prejudices, and its theories. 

There is one other science to be mentioned here as an im 
portant preparation, namely, the science of Medicine; but as 
this is a somewhat new position, and as it is desirable to avoid 
repetition, the evidences of this should be postponed to the head 
of The Individual," and of "Health" and "Life." 


1. Not the Classes generally supposed. 

The question now occurs, whom are we to look to for Social 
Science ? No great advance can be made in this science, except 
in an entire and sympathetic willingness to receive light from all 
sources. But as to what classes of persons to look to for Social 


Science, we observe, that they are certainly NOT the inferior 
classes of infidels. Great reasoning powers, great culture, may 
enable a few of them, as in the case of Comte, to rise to a val 
uable height in the comprehension of all those parts of the 
subject that are not expressly spiritual. But inferior minds 
must be guided by sound instincts, rather than by intellectual 

Furthermore, we are not to look to the REGULARS, whether 
politicians statesmen or lawyers. For these, by devoting their 
minds wholly to their own particular branch of the science, are 
not competent to take a liberal or unbiased view of the whole 

Another reason is, the habit of studying political questions 
chiefly for immediate action and application, begets the habit of 
endeavoring to found and build merely temporary contrivances 
on everlasting foundations, and then of reasoning backwards, 
and from the permanency of the foundations, rashly assuming 
the permanency of the superstructure. Statesmen and lawyers, 
anxious to have the strongest possible arguments for present 
measures, work powerfully to argue and convince Mankind that 
their measures are absolutely required by the eternal nature of 
things. What is wanted is, that such certain eternal and ever 
applicable principles should be discovered and elucidated, as 
should be both flexible and comprehensive enough to apply to 
all temporary and varying real necessities, without at all im 
plying, either that the institutions or the logical arguments for 
them, were absolute or permanent. The devotees to any science 
or business are the great obstructions to progress in it ; except 
perhaps they be the GREAT discoverers. And it is strictly in 
accordance with^ these facts, that little hope of governmental 
improvement is to be expected from professional politicians. 

M. Comte preceded us in a similar conclusion ; yet it is a part 
of his theory, that government is finally to be placed at the dis 
posal of scientific men, although not of the savans of any par 
ticular science, but of a class of savans not yet arisen, and whom 
he does not think it possible to point out beforehand. As to the 
world's physical scientists generally, notwithstanding the valu 
able aid their previous studies have given them for fitness to 
encounter the great problems of social life, yet they are gener- 


ally so absorbed with hobbies, so ambitious of scientific fame, 
so unmetaphysical in their methods of thought, and often so 
half-skeptical religiously, and so conceited in their own opinions 
of the true principles of that science of society which they have 
not yet studied, that there seems but little hope as yet of their 
doing much for it. Perhaps it will be soon introduced into the 
colleges and universities, as a branch of the regular course. 
And then we might expect it to attract the attention of the 
pious scientists. But what is usually studied as Social Sci 
ence in those institutions, is little more than enlarged Political 

2. The Real Promoters. 

As yet, those who have done most to aid Social Science, are 
probably, Socrates (or Plato), Fourier, Comte, and Herbert 
Spencer, who are the most profound scientific generaiists of all 

A more likely class than either the ordinary statesmen or the 
ordinary physicists, to look to for Social Science, would be the 
true scientific Theologians, if they had the time to spare from 
their other avocations. But this seems seldom to happen ; since 
most of them either have the charge and the daily labor of large 
church congregations, or else of educational institutions. These 
latter, namely, the theological head officers of the secular institu 
tions, may contribute much towards our science, when there arises 
a sufficient public demand to turn their business attention to it, 
and when more leisure is afforded them. Theologians are, by 
their training, best fitted for universal or general study. Wells, 
whose occupation is the examination of heads, says, " As a class 
they (the Theologians) have the best heads in the world." 
(Physiognomy, p. 488.) 

Another evidence that Theologians are to be looked to for 
Social Science, is found in the fact of the success of their com 
munities. The founders of the successful communities have 
nearly always been Theologians originally, even if uneducated 
ones, or if they had afterwards deserted their Theology. Actual 
successes of this kind evidence practical knowledge of Social 
Science, and also ability in new developments. 

The only regular students of Social Science of moderate cali 
ber, who have yet done much for it, are the communists. These, 


by evidencing their faith in their own theories, by lives of com 
munism and self-sacrifice, present new elements, namely, profound 
sincerity and self-sacrifice, powerfully co-operating in their study 
of the science. 

Here also should be added all those classes of persons, 
who, upon principle, like the primitive Christians, the original 
Quakers, and some more modern peace-men and innovators, 
personally and individually disregard tyrannical laws, whether 
of government or of fashion. 

Another reason why Theologians, religious and benevolent 
persons, are necessary in the improvement of Social Science, is, 
that they alone proclaim to any rulers (whether kings or peoples) 
the peculiar portions of truth that they respectively need. Other 
professions will flatter their kings, if in a monarchy; or will 
flatter the people, if in a democracy. The epithet for the leaders 
and politicians of the old Jewish people was, "they who call the 
people blessed," as any one may see by merely referring to the 
marginal renderings in our usual large Bibles. Thus, in Isaiah 
iii. 12 : " O my people, they which lead thee," (marginal reading, 
"they which call thee blessed"), "cause thee to err, and destroy 
the way of thy paths." Again, Isaiah ix. 16 : " For the leaders 
of this people," (marginal reading, " they that call them blessed") 
" cause them to err ; and they that are led of them are destroyed." 

We must not omit to enumerate the brave and devoted mis 
sionaries scattered over heathen countries, and various explorers 
geographical and scientific, who are sending home new ideas 
and new truths of social philosophy, gathered by experience and 
on the spot, of such various social systems as .they necessarily 
encounter and naturally study and appreciate. 

There is also another class who are doing noble but sporadic 
work, in aid of our science. They are generally retired states 
men or professionals, or retired merchants, or Christian men 
of considerable means, some of whom are to be found almost 
everywhere. They turn their attention generally, each to some 
one or few special points in the study or the practice. 

Dr. Craig suggests th'at clergymen and physicians COULD be 
of great use to Social Science by their facilities for collecting 
statistics of such a private and moral nature, as it is scarcely 
possible could be derived from any other sources. 



1. Observation. 

We have now to consider the means and data of the science 
of society. This can consist only in a very small degree of per 
sonal observation, and only in the persons of leading statesmen, 
and in times of peculiar contemporaneous national events. And 
such observation will be far less applicable to the government 
of great Nations, than to the government of small Precincts. 
The larger and more populous the territory, the less can its 
affairs be observed by one human mind, or conducted in one age 
of life. Social observation therefore mainly consists of history. 
The great want here is for brief histories which shall represent 
principles rather than events. Such works would be nearly the 
same thing as " histories of civilization" of each particular coun 
try. They should prove,, as to the case of each Nation for itself, 
the general rules and general consequences of the various prin 
ciples of national action. This is what Paley's theory proposes, 
but for a diiferent purpose, namely, for his proposed basis of 

2. Experiment. 

If Social Science is ever to become a real science, experiments 
must be encouraged in it, as really as in all the other sciences. 
But almost the only experiments of any thoroughness we have 
of late years are communistic, except a few experiments on some 
peculiar methods of settling unoccupied lands. Our Precinct 
system affords much the best basis for experiment. This system 
consists in forming very small Precincts of, and in, some one 
great Nation, and allowing within each Precinct, the utmost in 
ternal liberty and self-government, consistent with the general 
prosperity of the whole ; in fact, an establishment of a United 
States of Precincts, on the general principle of " mind its own 
business" so long as it allows every person to leave a Precinct, 
if he does not like it, and does not interfere with others 7 equal 
liberty, nor with the general welfare. 

This system, indeed is almost the only hopeful or desirable 
basis. Because, if large national experiments preceded the pre 
cinct experiments, vast ruin might follow in case of non-success. 
And the consequences also might be not rapid enough to teach 
the living generation who actually try the experiment. Further- 


more, this Precinct system is one which in itself would be the 
germ of all subsequent continuous peaceful and agreeable ex 

The next best kind of experiments are well organized volun 
tary corporations, as for instance, the moral communes. These 
ought to be encouraged by law, and be by every other reason 
able facility allowed to organize into townships or counties, 
or whatever other local government, their extent or prosperity 
might enable them to attain ; always holding the commune or 
corporation responsible for the reasonable care of its women and 
children. Ntf communes have succeeded unless they have been 
governed by good and wise men. They ought to be protected 
therefore, because according to our theory, government ought to 
be in the hands of wise men, namely, those who possess the 
transcendental elements most fully. Furthermore, all com 
munes, even bad ones, are types and miniatures of society at 
large ! and the evil ones teach us lessons at their own expense, 
and by their own free choice. Only keep them apart, so as not 
to contaminate the rest of society. 

In all .sciences we must keep in mind the conditions. And 
one of the conditions of any desirable social experiment for a 
free people is, of course, that the persons who enter upon it 
should do so VOLUNTARILY, and from real conviction. Other 
wise it is no experiment of the natural workings of free or 
desirable society; but it is a mere experiment in tyranny, in 
corruption, or in punishment. Hence arises the great necessity 
for allowing to all social experimenters, the fullest possible lib 
erty consistent with the equal rights of others, provided they 
will keep themselves from intruding their objectionable features 
before and upon the rest of society. 

In regard to the use of experiments, we may observe that 
they give, not merely a balance of contradictory arguments, 
when some great and good principle or plan is found to succeed 
in some one or more cases, but not at all in others. On the 
contrary, wherever a great and good principle or plan has tri 
umphantly succeeded, even only once, it is a sure proof that the 
principle or plan is PRACTICABLE FOR HUMAN NATURE. And 
thus, every new attainment is the advancement to a new posi 
tion by the vanguard of improvement. In other words, a prin- 


ciple established for one, is established for all. Mankind, some 
of them at least, are improving, and are gradually becoming fit 
for better and better social conditions. And the exact amount 
of this fitness, is entirely too complicated an answer, to be ob 
tained by any theoretical or a priori argument. The net total 
resultant of the many conflicting and variable forces, acting 
from time to time, can only be ascertained by trial itself. 

And what, after all, is the history of any nation, and of its 
laws and wars and government ? what, but a series of experi 
ments, now with one object and now with another, yet having 
scarcely any more of the scientific conditions of a USEFUL 
experiment, than an eclipse or an earthquake. 

This is the era of political experiment all over the world, 
and this fact probably shows one of the final causes for the divi 
sion of Mankind into nations or races, namely, the better to com 
pel them to try different series of disconnected experiments, as 
to the structure and laws of society : then, that process having 
continued for ages, the present stage of civilization and universal 
exchange, serves to point to a time having arrived when each 
Precinct and Nation is to study all the others, and to try what 
ever it finds in any of them that would appear beneficial to it. 
This, then, is the era of universal experiment in social and 
political, as well as in the other sciences, when each Nation is 
trying experiments from suggestions derived from any or all 
of the others. 

3. Modification of Expediency Doctrine. 

Another one of the data for social science is, a modification 
of the doctrine of expediency ; namely, a reasoning from general 
consequences and general rules, in such a way that the general 
consequences are used to obtain general moral rules, not inde 
pendent of, but only in connection with, the moral instincts. 
Such general rules are substantially the same as Dr. Paley's 
Principles of Moral Philosophy would become, by taking the 
moral instincts into its connection formally, as indeed he often 
does materially essentially and instinctively, in the course of his 
work. No doctrine of expediency can be received, altogether 
regardless of the moral instincts, nor can these be taken without 
the other ; but right and expediency always go together, with 
the privilege, amid contending principles, to prefer that which 


happens to be the clearest in any given case; and never swerv 
ing from the great foundations of morality, namely, the sanction 
of God and the equality of the rights of men under the same 

4. Return to First Principles. 

Allowing now, that reasoning from cause and effect, and from 
general theories of society, based upon cause and effect alone; 
or starting with theories that can just as well be turned into 
exactly opposite directions and developments, that such reason 
ing is altogether insufficient of itself to invent or discover the 
true social system or true Social Science : nevertheless, we must 
always be ready in our reasonings, to return to the first principles 
of things ; and not wander far off into answers to arguments, 
and then replies to answers, and then objections to replies, and 
the removal of the objections, and then answers to those re 
movals, and so on as may be done endlessly. 

There is a class of Social Scientists, (with whom, it is to be 
regretted, Spencer has almost enrqlled himself), who argue that 
government ought not to do nor to attempt to do, scarcely any 
thing except to keep the peace among its own citizens, and 
organize for fighting with the citizens of other governments. 
They argue for letting natural laws take their course, as fully in 
all sanitary matters, as in sumptuary ones ; and they ask us to 
let death multiply until Individuals will of their Own accord 
provide for the health of a city ; they ask this, even with the 
same pertinacity that they ask to let men eat and dress extrava^ 
gantly until checked by their reaching the bottom of their 
pockets. This leads to the necessity of showing, that we must 
resort to first principles in order to answer these arguments. 

Let us consider some instances of the kind of proof required ; 
discretionary power is given to trustees, agents, representa 
tives, judges, governors, in order that the discretion may be used 
for the cause of truth and justice, as against the impossibility 
of government making exact and perfect rules beforehand. But 
when those officers use a " hook or crook 7 ' of exact rule, to author 
ize a violation of truth or j ustice, and would plead their discretion 
ary powers, they violate t\\e first principles in the case, and must re 
turn to first principles, in order to see the error of their argument. 

Again, it is admitted, private charity is better than public; 


the first principle being, that private character is able to be 
investigated more truly by the benevolent and on the voluntary 
principle, than by government. But, when we find Individuals 
failing to do a necessary work, when we find whole tribes and 
districts and scattered millions, famishing, and no sufficient 
private aid coming, the public must come to the rescue, and 
justify itself by recurring to first principles. 

Again, when the elective franchise is given, and decisions are 
made according to majority, all is intended for the reason or first 
principle, that it is supposed that the possession of that franchise 
by all, is a needed means for the protection of their own rights. 
But when they would use the idea of the majority, to take away 
the rights of others, their arguments should return to first prin 
ciples. And the mere will of a majority, can find no arguments 
to defend it, in trampling on the rights of a minority. 

Now, when some would allege, very restricted powers to gov 
ernment, that it must in fact do almost nothing, but (that which, 
by the way, it cannot do at all, namely) protect life and prop 
erty, they are fond of assuming or trying to prove, that govern 
ment was not instituted for any of those other purposes. They 
think they then recur to the first principles of the thing. But ; 
Do they ? Or shall we ask, what was man himself instituted 
for ? Was man made for Sunday, or Sunday made for man ? 
Was man made for law, or law made for man ? If this, then, 
is the first principle of the thing, the do-nothing governmental- 
ists are in the wrong theory ; who would let one set of un 
thrifty idle poor starve, in order that others might learn more 
foresight ; or one set of strong passioned men and girls rot, that 
others might learn to avoid the danger, &c., &c. Some Socio 
logical arguments favoring the absurdest conclusions, can be 
fully -and satisfactorily answered in this manner, which might 
take whole volumes to refute in any other manner ; so compli 
cated and abstruse is the whole science, and so mixed up with 
local prejudices and visionary theories. 

The fact is, that for practical application, all abstract princi 
ples must undergo a degree of concrete integration ; and the 
definite quantities and " constants" which had been dropped in 
differentiation, must be restored. This is readily accomplished 
by a resort to the first principles of things. 


5. Analogies of Natural Laws. 

Then we have the analogies of natural laws, beginning with 
the laws of inorganic matter, and ascending to those of the 
vegetable, and finally of the animal. And as we rise in the 
scale of existence, always of course, pay more and more respect 
to the analogies which gradually approach the human being 
himself. In the application of this principle, Comte made 
great advances beyond Fourier, and Spencer, still greater ad 
vances beyond Comte, and Carey also has made some use of 
natural laws for analogies, but only or chiefly of those drawn 
from the inanimate world. It is the introduction of these kinds 
of analogies into Social Science, that seems to be its strongest 
attraction to the modern physicists. And by their influence, 
analogies which formerly were considered to be nothing more 
than very pretty figures of speech, are now admitted to be 
fundamental laws of the Science. 

The great Social Scientists, such as Fourier, Comte, Spencer, 
avow a causal connection between the lower order of creatures, 
organic and inorganic, and the nature of man, individual and 
social. Even Plato, Swedenborg and others, who do not appear 
to accept the doctrine of a causal connection, make free use of 

the resemblances. 

6. The Tribe-Principle. 

There is another principle upon which we build much of our 
Social Science. It is the theory of the tribe ; namely, the theory 
that the tribe-element of primitive stages of mankind, disap 
pears as to its form, in modern or developed society ; but yet, as 
to its essence, reappears therein under several different forms. 
This we call the tribe-principle. The developments of this, 
will be found frequently recurring in the progress of this work. 
We have not met with any work on Social Science, hitherto, 
which makes any practical application of the tribe-element, to 
modern society. 

7. The Type-Theory. 

We have the type-theory ; according to which, the Individual 
human being is regarded as a type of Family, and of all the 
other personal units more complicated. And then, the Family is 
likewise regarded as the type of the Precinct, and of all the 
other Units more general than it ; and so on, up to the Nation, 


and even to Mankind. This is a very different idea, from merely 
using the Individual man or any other animal, as the type of 
society at large, as has been done by Plato, Hobbes, Spencer, and 
many others. Besides the increased complexity and development 
of our use of the thought, ours has a less outward, but a more 
/noral, origin and nature. See that other view pretty fully 
treated in the Westminster Review, January, 1860, in Spencer's 
article, " The Social Organism." Extracts therefrom will be 
found under the head of Individual. 

The substance of our theory, as has been mentioned already, 
is the typical ness of each and all the different personal elements, 
or units of society : and this in such a sense, that each one is 
typical of all those that are more general than itself. 

The way whereby we came to alight upon this theory, was 
this. In the course of the study of Social Science, it soon be 
came apparent, that, amid such a conflict of different theories 
and contending suggestions, it would be simply impossible to 
weigh and consider them all fully and in detail ; and that 
consequently, the disputes in Social Science could never be 
settled in that way. The question then almost became, either 
to give up the science in despair, or try to find some more prac 
ticable method of proof. At last it appeared, that in nature 
there are certain objects and circumstances, that, when used by 
a proper instinct and not superficially, at once and by analogy 
show forth results and consequences, with more certainty and 
truth than the deepest or most complicated reasonings. 

Tht case is, as Howson says, " When an important change is 
at hand, God usually causes a silent preparation in the minds 
of men ; and some great fact occurs, which may be taken as a 
type and symbol of the whole movement." 

For the proof of our theory of types, we appeal, partly to 
the existence of typical forms in general, and to fundamental 
analogies as existing in common sense, and as the data and basis 
of the judgments of common sense. 

It is a wonderful fact, that we often find in common life, and 
even with inexperienced persons, a degree of common sense that 
is truly surprising. And among the uneducated classes gener 
ally, there seems to prevail more wisdom about many matters, 
than can be found among those given to the deepest researches 
of reasoning. 


One of the best, and probably one of the first cases, of the 
analogy of the individual with human society, is given by St. 
Paul, (1 Gor. xii.), and applied to the church. But evidently, 
the principle is applicable to every form of human society, from 
the Family upward. " For as the body is one, and hath many 
members, and all the members of that one body, being many, 
are one body: so also is Christ. . . . For the body is not one 
member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not 
the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the 
body? ... If the whole body were an eye, where were the 
hearing ? . . . But now hath God set the members, every one 
of them, in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they 
were all one member, where were the body ? . . . And the eye 
cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee ; nor again, 
the head to the feet, I have no need of you. . . . And those 
members of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon 
these we bestow more abundant honor. . . . For our comely parts 
have no need ; but God hath tempered the body together, having 
given more abundant honor to that part which lacked ; that there 
should be no schism in the body, but that the members should 
have the same care one for another. And whether one member 
suffer, all the members suffer with it ; or one member be hon 
ored, all the members rejoice with it." 

Fundamental analogies may be further perceived among ab 
stract subjects and questions. Consider now, such questions as 
the right and principle of civil government at all; or the true 
principles of church organizations, or the relation of church to 
state. The discussions on ordinary principles seem endless. 
But, by fixing our minds on some of the simple but essential 
elements of society, say, the Individual, or the Family, or 
even on some one locality or Precinct, we obtain a type or 
basis for a class of analogies which are not only suggestive, but 
to a certain extent also, logically conclusive. Further illustra 
tions will be found at the commencement of the part on the 
"Individual" and especially at the commencement of the part 
on the "Family" And the chief type and illustration is the 
Family; even as Comte says, that it is both the unit and the type 
of society at large. 

The doctrine of fundamental analogies, harmonizes somewhat 


with the old Platonic thought of the real existence of general 
ideas and general forms. And it would seem that all creation 
is but an evolution from, and a development of, these general 
forms. Yet still our idea is not so much that, as this other 
thought, that all life repeats itself more or less, and produces 
microcosms ; that everything re-types itself, and that some of 
these fruits are so closely and truly microcosms, that they may 
safely be taken as typical forms. 

Swedenborg also agrees, that by " correspondences" the ani 
mals have their instinctive knowledge, and that man is like 
them therein, (Heaven and Hell; 108 and 110), that uses are 
the same in all worlds, but the same use takes different forms in 
different worlds ; and that the correspondence in forms, results 
from the sameness of use. (H. and H. ; 112.) 

When the greatest philosophers and anatomists of the world, 
were vainly endeavoring to reason out a great archetype, or gen 
eral outline-skeleton for all animal life, the poet Goethe perceives, 
that a leaf is the archetype wanted. Prof. Owen has enlarged 
this idea into a system of creation according to an " ideal typical 
vertebra," as in the Divine mind. But Owen, having confused 
this capital thought with a very different one, namely, the purely 
mechanical " old fogy" undevelopment-idea of creation, laid him 
self open to cavil. 

The basis of these fundamental analogies, seems to rest in the 
very ultimate beginning principles of inanimate matter. In gen 
eral, perhaps the theory is admissible that many of the primal 
conglomerations or organizations in nature, are in the forms of 
their totalities or ultimates ; crystals, in the form of their totality, 
and the primal parts of seeds and germs, in the form of their 
completed wholes, and the parts of the brain in the form of the 
whole. And even all motion might be the result of the original 
rotary motion, supposed to have existed in the beginning of 
creation. Everywhere, from highest to lowest, in the move 
ments of being nebula, suns, planets,* electricity, stomach, 
blood EVERYWHERE we find the great element of circuitous 
motion. However, it is beyond our depth, to give " positive" 
knowledge of the foundations of fundamental analogies. 

8. Ideals. 

(a) Historical Ideals. Imaginary and ideal original states of 


society, are experiments of some kind, on our own minds, and 
are efforts to reach the great archetypes within our own minds, 
are latent activities on the basis of an inward type theory; so 
that, among the data for Social Science, and among the scientific 
means of improving it, may be mentioned this inevitable tend 
ency of the human mind, to imagine peculiar states of society 
in its most simplified forms : Thus, the church-hypothesis, of 
one original pair for all Mankind, and they created in a state of 
moral and intellectual perfection : Also, the opposite hypothesis, 
that Mankind were originally a set of barbarians, but little if 
any, superior to the unreasoning animals. Each of these oppo 
site hypotheses answers to explain different phenomena of society. 
The church-hypothesis explains the laws of the moral nature of 
individual man ; whilst the barbarian hypothesis serves to explain 
the scientific, social, and governmental progress of Mankind as a 
race or as a whole. 

Then, again, imaginary conditions of society, and imaginary 
positions of Individuals may be conceived ; and these may serve 
to show the superior worth of man and life, above all fashions 
and property and earthly distinctions. They also help us to 
form a judgment as to what are the strongest passions of human 
nature. The principle is just like the great advice, to do unto 
others as we would that they should do unto us : it is an experi 
ment upon our own moral consciousness. 

(6) Prospective Ideals. This sort of reasoning is the founda 
tion of ideals- for the future of human society; and thus, of 
hopes for society, and thus becomes a guide of struggles for the 
improvement of Mankind. But imaginary states are, in the 
main, necessary to the pursuit of any study, in a truly analytical 
method; for the subsequent re-integration that is necessary to 
form science, cannot follow without ideals as to mental aim. 

Nor is our ideal to be supposed to be a reach at absolute per 
fection. On the contrary, it is an ideal modified so as to come 
within the writer's ideas of present human possibilities. And 
it is by no means supposed to be the end of all progress or of all 
ideals, on this subject. As for its scientific value as an aid to 
study, we hope to place our ideal at least in the same category 
as Plato's Republic, More's Utopia, Fourier's Association, and 
Ball oil's True System of Human Society ; and that is not saying 


very much for either of them. Its practicability is altogether 
another question, and is reserved for its proper place in a sepa 
rate "book." Our ideal is such a universal cooperation as 
would have to be called Limited or Christian communism. By 
communism, we mean, not freedom of sex, but cooperation and 
mutuality, in religion, in self-government and in industry, 
in incomes, and labors, and general life, in all things moral 
and lawful, and by doing to others perfectly as we would be 
done by, as only can be done in " association"-life. 

Judaism owes much of its power to its having its ideal king 
dom of the Messiah, as its central point, which it was its duty 
constantly to seek; and which it was certain it would finally 

9. Efficacy for solution of phenomena. 

But the greatest and best proof of the excellence of our theory, 
is of the same kind as presents itself in every science, namely, 
the success of the applications of our individual theories, to the 
solution of all the facts, and to the general classification of the 
subject as a whole. This argument is of such a nature, that we 
hope it will gradually increase, even to the end of the last divi 
sion, where it comes to be applied to the difficult problems 
and relations of civil government, of religion, communism, and 
human life. But yet, so thoroughly is the nature of this sort 
of argument understood in the physical sciences, that we scarcely 
need mention it again. 


In a new and undeveloped science, some greater attention to 
preliminaries of method and arrangement, may be excused, and 
is even demanded, than in the case of the more developed and 
better ascertained sciences. 

There are two main methods of pursuing any science, the 
analytical and the synthetical. The synthetical consists in lay 
ing down the subject in a regular and connected order, so that 
what follows is generally based upon what precedes, simply as 
possible, and sustained by demonstrations of the truth of what 
has been said. The analytical, is the handling of the constituent 
parts of a subject in the various ways POSSIBLE. It consists, 
first, in taking the subject all apart and considering each part 


separately, then combining those parts together repeatedly, with 
a view to forming some synthetical arrangement. But, as first 
attempts are generally unsuccessful, the first forms of synthesis 
will be unsatisfactory. Then the whole subject must necessarily 
be re-analyzed. And this process continues to be repeated, with 
an increase of knowledge and experience gained by previous 
operations ; and all this, in regard both to ideas and to general 
classifications. And, in the sense in which we are here using the 
words analytical and synthetical, they are both included in the 
term inductive, as distinguished from deductive. And the term 
deductive applies to the synthetical, chiefly as to the deduction 
of the classifications. We deduce mostly forms, not substance 
nor inferences, by this method of thinking. 

Another feature of the analytical method is, that we pursue 
our studies in regard to all the different parts of the subject at 
the same time. In fact we do this in the same manner, to some 
extent, as if they were entirely different subjects, but constantly 
are on the watch for every suggestion that may arise, of com 
parisons with or relations to, any of the other parts of the sub 
ject as a whole. We seek ideas within our own minds, half 
ramblingly it may be, just as a physicist wanders over the. earth 
for glacier-stones, fish-bones, and stone hatchets. And this is 
exactly the point of the process where new ideas arise. - : " ,, 

Another point of contrast between the two methods is, that 
the synthetical usually aims to be argumentative, in such a way 
that argumentative conclusions are constantly intended and 
looked for, in such works as admit of argument ; so that they 
are valuable chiefly in proportion to the soundness and variety 
of the arguments adduced. But the analytical process is gener 
ally corrupted, at least at first, in proportion as it has in mind 
any particular theory or object to prove. So that, while synthe 
sis aims to prove this or that particular truth already believed 
in, analysis hunts and seeks for any truths it can find that ap 
propriately relate to the subject. 

One word as to the manner in which this work has been 
wrought out:' The manner has been purely analytical. After 
storing the mind with much that others had written ; and writing 
short notes or essays on various points as they occurred, writing 
perchance on the same day, short essays or notes on parts of the 



subject the most distant or the most unlike : we found that the 
facts or doctrines thus having been cut up and analyzed, sug 
gested other points or positions or questions, which all had to be 
noted down immediately, to be afterwards further examined. 
And subsequently, all these suggestions had to be arranged and 
compared and collated together. This part of the process was 
synthetical, and made further suggestions, whereby the work be 
came what it is. And all these various changes took place, as 
well in regard to the methods forms and classifications of the 
ideas, as in regard to the ideas themselves. 


1. The Classifications in general. 

One objection to most Social Sciences is, that their writers, 
each has his own peculiar pet scheme or theory, and frames 
his whole work so as to be a special pleading in favor of some 
such theory. Now, to have a theory is no objection; but to 
twist the classification to suit it, to have only ONE theory, and 
to stake the treatment of a whole philosophical work, to favor 
such a one theory, is a thing not done in other sciences claiming 
to be inductive or philosophical. 

The first great desideratum in Social Science, would be a work 
which would give such a scientific and truthful general outline 
of the subject, as could be easily used in any of the diiferent 
theories on the same subject. Thus it would be a real analysis 
of the subject itself, objectively, as to its generally ascertained 
facts and principles. The originator of such a classification, 
containing at least a compend of the principal ideas on the sub 
ject, would be a lasting friend to posterity; even should it not 
add any single new idea to our stock of knowledge about it. 
For classification is the foundation and essential of all the sci 

Now, it seems that the principal merits of a scientific classi 
fication of any book, besides those already mentioned, are that 
it be such as to avoid repetitions as much as possible ; that it 
arrange the different parts in such an order of succession, that 
what precedes will facilitate the understanding of what follows : 
and that that which precedes, will also serve as argumentative 
premises, for reasonable conclusions in the parts that follow. 


This latter attainment, however, is rarely possible, consistently 
with the other two, and in an analytical work of this kind, can 
hardly be expected. So then, our classification may be consid 
ered successful, in proportion as it avoids repetitions, and ar 
ranges the parts that precede, so as to make intelligible those 
that follow, trusting to the consistency of the whole, as one 
of its main arguments. 

We will now endeavor to do what is certainly a very hard 
thing to do, namely, to classify the classifications of this very 
abstract subject. 

2. Zoological Classifications. 
(a) Zoological, By others. 

The Zoological classifications of Social Science, trace analo 
gies with the various parts of a man, or other animal. 

Spencer in Westm. Rev., and in Ills. Prog., has shown many 
of the advantages and disadvantages of this form of treatment. 
Plato adopts the correspondence of reason, will, and passion, for 
the divisions of society. Hobbes adopts "that Leviathan great 
man called the commonwealth," and its parts. Swedenborg 
makes the societies of heaven and hell, to be in the " forms" of 
a man, and carries out the analogies into the very minute parts. 
It has often seemed to the writer, that Spencer's splendid classi 
fication for vegetable and animal Biology, might, with slight 
adaptations, be equally splendid for Social Biology ; namely, for 
Social Science itself. 

(b) Zoological, By us. 

The writer's first classification was MEDICAL and biological, 
as follows : and in the subdi visions of each of the five main 
parts, all the ones (1 s ) correspond with or relate to each other, 
and all the twos (2 s ) with each other, and so on, with the 3 s 
and 4 s . 

(I.) Social Physiology.- 

1. Sensible System. 

2. Vital System. 

3. Motive or Mechanic System. 

4. Life-power in its totality. 

(II.) Social Therapeutics. 

1. Theory of Medicine. 

2. Practice of Medicine. 

3. Pharmacy. 

4. Hygiene. 


(III.) Sociological Powers and Organs. 

1. Mental, Moral, Psychological, Mysterious and Philosophical. 

2. Vital, Circulative, Unseen, Scientific. 

3. Motive, Mechanical, Material, Structural, Obvious, and Political. 

4. Harmonious, Completed result, Perfect cure, and Limited Com 

(IV.) Classes of Society. 

1. Moral and Religious classes. 

2. Intellectual and Educated classes. 

3. Physical classes. 

4. Holy Instinctive classes (?) 

(V.) Departments of Government. 
\. Constitutions. 

2. Laws. 

3. Usual Offices. 

4. New Offices. 

3. Abstract Ungeneric Classifications. 

Albert Brisbane classifies thus : Education : Industry : Social 
Laws and Institutions : Government : Religion : Accessory 
Branch, including Fine Arts and Sciences. 

The Chinese " Statutes and Rescripts of the Great Pure Dy 
nasty," are arranged thus : General : Civil : Fiscal : Ritual : 
Military : Criminal : and Public Works. 

Carey suggests as main divisions, simply: Political Econ 
omy : and Jurisprudence. 

Mulford in his preface, implies a classification which may be 
expressed thus : Political Economy : Jurisprudence : Statistics 
(or Statics?): Political History: and Political Science in general. 

Here follow classifications by five great institutions: and then 
follow two of our Summary ones. (A) is of the British Assoc. 
of Soc. Science. (B) is of the European International Associa 
tion. (C) is of the American Assoc. of Soc. Science. (D) is of 
the Western Social Sci. Association. (E) is of the School of the 
French Empire, for its course of studies. (F) is our Summary 
of these five, made for a comparison of them with one of our 
classifications, to be given hereinafter. And (G) is ours, modi 
fied here for the comparison. 

The perpendicular lines vary, so that the spaces between them, 
will carefully exhibit the comparative scopes, of the works and 
of the sub-headings of their respective authors ; i.e.. Law in (B) 
means more than in (A), but less than in (C). Finance in (D) 


means more than in (E) but less than in (F). And the whole 
line or scope of (B, D, E or F) means more than in (A) or (C) 
and less than in (G). And crime in (A) consists of a part of 
what (B) calls " Law," and a part of what it calls " Health and 

Social Economy | Law | Crime . . . | Health . . | Education | 
Pol.-Economy | Law . . . | Health and Charity . . | Art & Literature | 

Finance . . . j Law j Health . . | Education | 

Finance . . . | Law | Health . . | Education | Fine Arts | 

Finance . | Political Economy | Law | Statistics | . . ? . . | 

Financial . . . | Political . | Legal . . | Philosophical . . . | 
Property . . . . | Politicals | Philosophical | Personals | 


(a) Generic, By others. 
Fourier's ideas may be classified thus : 

(I) Universal laws of matter and mind. (1) The series dis 
tributes the harmonies. (2) Attractions are proportioned to Des 
tinies. (3) Analogy is universal. 

(II) Fundamental passions of human nature. (1) Sensuous 
desires. (2) Moral-Social affections. (3) Intellectual and dis 
tributive impulses. (4) Unity-ism. 

(III) Fundamental elements of society. (1) Capital. (2) 
Science. (3) Labor. 

(IV) Attractive industry ; chiefly by means of groups within 
series, systematically and harmonically arranged. 

Both Comte and Spencer divide Social Science into Statics 
and Dynamics ; but disagree as to what are the lines, or even 
what the principles, of the division. 

Comte's view of Social Science is given as his Social Physics, 
and may be condensed thus : Principal Philosophical Attempts 
at a Social Science : Characteristics of the Positive Method in 
Social Phenomena: Relation of Sociology to Positive Philos 
ophy; Social Statics, or Theory of the Spontaneous Order of 
Society, including the Individual, the Family, and Society in 
the abstract. 

Social Dynamics, or Theory of the Natural Progress of So 
ciety : First Theological Phase, Fetichism, Beginning of the 
Theological and Military System: Second Phase, Polytheism, 
Development of the Theological and Military System : Third 
Phase, Age of Monotheism, Modification of the Theological 



and Military System : Metaphysical and Critical Period of 
Modern Society : Final Tendency of Modern Society : Final 
Action of the Positive Philosophy. 

Spencer's " Social Statics" is divided as follows : Funda 
mental Principles : Personal Rights : Political Rights : Connec 
tion with Social Dynamics. 

His proposed new work, which seems to be his Dynamics,, is, 
(like Comte's,) to consider historical progress mainly ; but is to 
be divided as follows : Pata of Sociology : Inductions of So 
ciology : Political Organization : Ecclesiastical Organization : 
Industrial Organization: Ceremonial or Custom-Organization: 
Lingual Progress : Intellectual Progress : ^Esthetic Progress : 
Moral Progress : Consensus. 

(6) Our Generic Classification. 
Table H. 

Supreme .rrm- Summary Introduction to 
ciplesofSo- Social Science 
cial Science J 1 



Division I : 

Instinctive or 

Social Circle 

Analytics of 
Social Science 

Elements, i. 
e., Units 


Rational De- | f 

liberative > < Corporation 

^ Element J [ 


Supreme Prin- " 
ciples of 

Introduction to Synthetics 
in general 

Division II : 

Physical Ele 

> Property 

Synthetics of 



Social Science 

> Intellectuals 




Civil Government 


^ Limited Communism 

The Science of Society is not yet sufficiently developed, to 
express its two main divisions accurately ; although the general 
conception seems clear enough. The division into Statics and 
Dynamics, (of Comte and Spencer,) is evidently too materialistic, 
inorganic, and lifeless. But Primary and Secondary, speaking 


in a figure from Geology, might answer. Or Anatomy and 
Physiology; or Structure and Functions. Or we might say, 
Pure Social Science, and Applied Social Science ; because, in the 
degree of abstractness, the Analytics is related to the Synthetics, 
somewhat as Pure Mathematics is to Applied Mathematics. But 
we prefer the terms Analytics and Synthetics. And then sub 
divide as annexed. 

(c) Some Higher Comparisons. 

This classification (H) by summing it up differently, namely, 
as our (G) in the ungeneric classifications previously given 
(IX. 3), may be compared with the one (F), there suggested as 
a summary of the classifications of the five great institutions 
there cited. This comparison may be made thus : 

Economical or Financial = Property. 

Political, includes, Precinct, Nation, and Corporation. 

Legal is Health, Civil Government, and Communism. 

Philosophical only touches Summary Introduction, Individ 
ual, Family, Social Circle, Mankind, Introduction to Synthetics, 
Life, Intellectuals, and Morals. 

Approximating the three in tabular form, thus ; 

* * 1 


| Property 

. . . Po 


Philosophicals .... 
Summary Introduction 
Introduction to Synthetics 
Intellectuals x 

Personals | 
Social Circle 

Health .... 
Civil Government 
Limited Communism 

Compare with the outline of Mr. Spencer's PROPOSED Sociol 
ogy. In which of course we can only guess where he would 
place them. 

Spencer's. Ours. 

Data of Sociology \ 

Inductions of Sociology } ' ' ' ' 

Ecclesiastical Organization 

Custom Organization Social Circle 

C Precinct 

Political Organization . J ^ ation , 

J Corporation 

(^ Civil Government 

Industrial Organization Property 

Lingual Progress ) T , ,, , 

Intellectual Progress / Intellectuals 



Esthetic Progress 

Moral Progress 

Consensus: and interdependence of 
structure and function. 


( Health 
I Individual 
1 Family 
^ Morals 

(d) Some Transcendental Analogies. 

The general relation between our Analytics and Synthetics, 
is analogous to the two kinds of primal forms of solid matter 
" Matter has two solid states, distinguished as crystalloid and 
colloid; of which the first is due to union of the individual 
atoms, and the second, to the union of groups of such indi 
vidual atoms ; and of which the first is stable and the second 
unstable." And again those two primal kinds are typical of the 
still more primal fundamental kinds, namely solid and gaseous; 
(because liquidity is only a transient state of matter, in its pas 
sage from solid to gas or from gas to solid.) Our Analytical 
Elements are supposed to be socially the individual atoms ; the 
Synthetics are supposed to consist of groups metaphysically, and 
hence are more complicated. 

Next observe two ascending series, resembling the octaves of 
the major scale in music, (do, re, mi, fa, sol, la, si, do,) one of 
which takes in the whole eight parts of the analytics ; and the 
other, the whole eight of the synthetics. They are to be read 
from the bottom, upwards. Musicians will understand them. 


8 Corporation. 

7 Mankind. 

6 Nation. 

5 Precinct. 

4 Social Circle. 

3 Family. 

2 Individual. 

1 Introduction. 


8 Limited Communism. 

7 Civil Government. 

6 Morals. 

5 Intellectuals. 

4 Health. 

3 Life. 

2 Property. 

1 Introduction. 



In the following four classifications, let all the ones (1 s ) be 
compared with each other, and all the twos (2 s ) with each other, 
and so on ; and some resemblances will be observed, besides the 
more obvious ones between 3 s and 4 s and between 7 s and 8 s . 

Comte's Final Outlines. 

1 Introduction. 

2 Mathematics. 

3 Astronomy. 

4 Physics. 

5 Chemistry. 

6 Biology. 

7 Sociology. 

8 [Ideal Humanity.] 

Our Synthetics. 

1 Introduction. 

2 Property. 

3 Life. 

4 Health. 

5 Intellectuals. 

6 Morals. 

7 Civil Government. 

8 Limited Communism. 

Our Analytics. 

1 Introduction. 

2 Individual. 

3 Family. 

4 Social Circle. 

5 Precinct. 

6 Nation. 

7 Mankind. 

8 Corporation. 

Oken's Outlines of Biology. 

1 Organ osophy. 

2 Phytogeny. 

3 Phyto-physiology. 

4 Phytology. 

5 Zoogeny. 

6 Physiology. 

7 Zoology. 

8 Psychology. 

We have many other such analogies, but have concluded to 
omit them. 

5. Our Order of Publication. 

As in music the tunes are made by generally deviating from 
the order of the gamut, so in the actual publication of our ideas, 
and for convenience' sake ; because those ideas will have to be 
published only gradually and in parts, as separate works, we 
will adopt a different GENERAL grouping. But what that gen 
eral grouping may be, we do not know in advance ; only this 
much. Our New Theory of Social Science would be pretty 
fairly represented by (I) Summary Introduction, or Theory of 
Social Science in General. (II) The Primary Fundamental 
Politico-organic elements, namely, Precinct, Nation and Corpo 
ration. And (III) The Ultimate Ideal, viz. Limited Commu 
nism. These subjects (we say nor mean not, our treatment of 
them) make up a real Principia of Social Science. 





THAT part of Social Science which treats of the fundamental 
principles of society itself, taken as a distinct part from the 
principles of the SCIENCE, goes on the assumption, that society, 
like any other part of nature, has its own rules, its own princi 
ples, and its own laws, a set of higher laws which embrace 
and over-rule all that governments and governors and individ 
uals do ; whether they will, or not. And, to investigate these 
higher laws, is one of the principal objects of Social Science, 
and is the particular object of this second part of this Intro 
duction. Those laws which are too general for any other part 
of the work, are collected in the Introduction. They are ar 
ranged, not so much in the order of subject or matter, as in the 
order of their abstractness and generality. 


1. Differences of Degrees of Things. 

In the higher organizations of the world, whether material or 
social, differences of degree are often more important than dif 
ferences of kind. For instance, the difference between the most 
improved and the least improved men, of any one and the same 
race, is greater than the difference between the most improved 
of the lowest race and the least improved of the highest race ; 
and the higher you rise in the scale of being, the more impor 
tant the difference of degrees becomes. Hence, we are never to 
be disturbed, in the separation of things widely different, be 
cause of there being a difficulty or even an impossibility, of 
exactly expressing or drawing the line, between them. 

In every question relating to the subject of governmental 


action, the question of the degree of interference, is more impor 
tant than the abstract one, of interference at all. And this 
holds true as to every kin<J of government, from that of a man 
over his dog, to that of the Supreme Being over the universe. 
Moreover, it is as important a question, when referring to the 
differences of the elements of materials of organic worlds, as to 
the differences between moral rights; as we will now try to 

This introduces the consideration of the functions of the in 
finities, the differentiations and integrations in the " calculus," 
whereby infinite differences in the degrees, make entire differ 
ences in the kinds, of the things considered. In a subsequent 
work we may perhaps show, that creation itself was probably a 
process of infinite integrations from nothing, and that the im 
portance of degrees pervades all creation, in regard to the first 
principles of things. 

The solution of the analogies between the physical and the 
intellectual world, can be found in only one or the other of two 
alternatives ; namely, either in the Doctrine of Universal Cor 
respondences, or in our doctrine of creation by integration. But 
yet, these two alternatives are not incompatibles. For, if the 
doctrine of correspondences is true, our doctrine of creation by 
integration does not interfere with it, but affords the only rational 
explanation of it. 

All the other explanations of creation are utterly unsatisfac 
tory. For, materialism is merely a hiding of ignorance, behind 
a cloud of scientific classifications. And Pantheism, whether 
true or false, is of no practical use in the solution. For, whether 
God created matter out of nothing, or whether He himself only 
takes the form of matter ; neither alternative explains how mind 
becomes matter, nor how matter becomes mind. And the doc 
trine of the eternal self-existence of matter, cannot explain how 
matter becomes mind, only by going back to Pantheism. In 
fact, both the materialistic and the Pantheistic philosophers, 
meet and stop at this point of the harmony of the physical with 
the social laws. 

Spencer's great idea, and what runs through all his works,, is, 
the idea of EVOLUTION from homogeneity into heterogeneity; 
and that when unity becomes differentiated into plurality, each 


factor becomes an outward condition tending to produce changes 
in the other factor. But yet he utterly ignores and denies the 
idea, of inherent or spontaneous power, in any factor, to change 
itself. (See Biology, 373, and elsewhere.) How strange it is, 
he cannot see, that if the germ of an animalcule, for instance, has 
no spontaneous power to change itself, neither could the original 
nebula of the universe have had any such power, either by the 
principle of " infinite chances, 77 or by any other principle. 
2. Analogies with Physical Laws. 

In addition to what have been previously given, we now give 
some of Carey's "General Social Laws," (abridged edition, 
pages 526 and 527.) " The simple laws which govern matter 
in all its forms, and which are common to physical and to 
SOCIAL SCIENCE, may now be briefly stated thus : " All par 
ticles of matter gravitate towards each other, the attraction being 
in the direct ratio of the mass, and the inverse one of the dis 
tance. 77 . . . " All matter is subjected to the action of the cen 
tripetal and the centrifugal forces ; the one, tending to the pro 
duction of local centres of action ; the other, to the destruction 
of such centres, and the production of a great central mass obe 
dient to but a single law. 77 . . . " The more perfect the balance 
of these opposing forces, the more uniform and steady is the 
movement of the various bodies, and the more harmonious, the 
action of the system in which they are embraced. 77 . . . " The 
more intense the action of these forces, the more rapid is the 
motion, and the greater the power. 77 

" Such are the laws which govern masses and atoms [i.e. re 
spectively] ; but there are other laws, in virtue of which, masses 
are reduced to atoms ready to enter into chemical combination 
with each other ; the tendency towards combination, existing in 
the direct ratio of the perfect individualization of the particles. 77 
These laws are : " That heat is a cause of motion and force ; 
motion being, in its turn, a cause of heat and force. 77 . . . " The 
more heat and motion produced, the greater is the tendency 
towards acceleration in the motion and the force. 77 . . . " The 
more the heat, the greater is the tendency towards decomposition 
of masses, and individualization of the particles of which they 
are composed, thus fitting them for entering into chemical com 
bination with each other. 77 . . . " The greater the tendency 


towards individualization, the more instant are the combina 
tions, and the greater the force obtained." ..." The more rapid 
the motion, the greater the tendency of matter to rise in the scale 
of form." ..." At every stage of progress, there is an extension 
of the range of law to which matter is subjected, accompanied 
by an increase of the power of self-direction, subordination and 
freedom, keeping steady pace with organization." 

" Studying man, we find : " That, association with his fellow- 
man is a necessity of his existence." ..." That, his powers are 
very various, and that the combinations of which they are sus 
ceptible are infinite in number, there being throughout the world, 
no two persons who are entirely alike." . . . "That, the develop 
ment of those infinitely various faculties, is wholly dependent 
upon the development of individuality." ..." That, the greater 
the diversity, the greater is man's power to control and direct 
the great forces of nature, and the larger is the number of per 
sons who can draw support from any given space, and the more 
perfect the development of the latent powers of both earth and 
man." ..." That, the more perfect the development, * * * the 
more rapid is the societary motion, and the greater the force 

3. Metaphysical operation of Social Laws. 

The Social Laws in general, operate, not like physical laws, 
regardless of men's faith or opinions about them } but to a great 
extent, they operate like the spiritual and religious laws of con 
science ; that is, they operate according as men have faith and 
expectation. At any rate, many of the laws of Social Science 
produce their effects, only as they are apprehended, and by being 
apprehended, by the reason and feelings of men. Thus, Distrust 
will bring a financial revulsion or " panic," whilst calm trust or 
heedless indifference or even ignorance, will sometimes avert one. 
Thus it is that speculation interferes with the legitimate opera 
tion of so many of the laws of Political Economy, and thus makes 
the study become one of human nature and of metaphysics, in 
stead of a study of finance. The metaphysical conditions which 
modify laws, and often even reverse their supposed effects, are 
not the mental states of those by whom the laws are made, but 
of those by whom and to whom the laws are to be applied. 
Hence, it comes to pass, that the intentions of law makers are 


nothing towards the success of civil laws ; nor commonly are 
the intentions of voters or electors much towards the success of 
getting either the candidates or the measures they want. 
4. Condensation of General Social Laws. 

Spencer's four great principles are, (1) That evil is the result 
of non-adaptation of character to circumstances. (2) That the 
better, both of principles and races, are the stronger and will 
gradually prevail over the worse, and thus evil tends gradually 
to disappear. (3) That every person has a right to entire lib 
erty, so far as his liberty does not interfere with the equal liberty 
of other persons. (4) That this principle of equal liberty is the 
principle of justice, and must be supplemented by an additional 
principle of " negative beneficence :" (Soc. Stat. p. 98) namely, 
" voluntary abstinence, for the sake of others, from the full ex 
ercise of our just rights." But we do not think he succeeds in 
showing how this latter will be accomplished. 

Miraculously or else traditionally Revealed Religion, alone can 
save society, as well as the Individual. It saves by general prin 
ciples and general means, which are real causes. These causes 
are already introduced into human nature, history and society. 
Nevertheless, God still has a connection with, and personal rule 
over those causes, and also over persons, so that the ignoring 
of God, is rebellion against him, and so, necessarily produces a 
false philosophy. To ignore God, even in the spontaneous dis 
appearance of evils, is to put stops to the working of the Cause 
of the spontaneous disappearance, and, therefore, stops to the 
disappearance itself. 

The spontaneous elimination and evanescence of evils, is only 
of WEAK evils ; unless, onthat ETERNAL and infinite plane, un 
known to mortals, where evil itself may be shown to be weakness. 

It is true yet, and must continue true for a long time, that 
morality and government must be the chief reliances, as substi 
tutes for that Animal instinct which guides brutes ; and, for that 
science of humanity which is not yet known. 

"All force expended in one direction, is lost in some other 
direction. No force is without its reciprocal action." The earth 
holds the moon in its course, but yet the moon makes the tides 
on the earth, and even draws the planet itself, some measure, out 
of its regular course. Compulsion spoils those who use it. 


" Man, can neither create nor annihilate," passions nor social 
powers, any more, than physical ones. "All that he can do, is 
to direct these forces," and to set them to balancing each other. 

Within certain but only narrow limits, wants create facilities 
and inventions and discoveries. This, it may be hoped, will 
occur, accordingly as men are brought more and more to see that 
they have great and real social needs, and to see the evils of their 
own systems. 

The social organism is like the individual, in being subject to 
a law, whereby there takes place a process of adaptation of per 
sonal character, to the conditions of Nature and of circumstance. 
But still, it is the duty of Society's doctors, " to AID Nature." 
As Spencer (Biology, 377) says, " In civilized man there is 
going on a new class of equilibrations, those between his (own) 
actions, and the actions of the societies he forms. (First Prin. 
135). Social restraints and requirements are forever altering 
his activities, and, by consequence, his nature ; and as fast as his 
nature is altered, social restraints and requirements undergo 
more or less re-adjustment." 

The higher the being, whether vegetable, animal, or society, 
the more true it is that it will have a separate organ for every 
different vocation or function. 

The makers, judges, and executors of laws are human ; and 
hence, selfish and shortsighted. And therefore we must consti 
tute our laws accordingly ; remembering the unreasonableness, 
&c. of the men who are to administer them. 

Government of all kinds, whether civil or communistic or 
family, must be absolutely free in proportion to the number 
of individuals involved in the application of any principle of 
law, and to their distance in space, and to their nearness in 
morality and intellect. 

The rights of the great divisions or Units of society, must 
ever be held inviolate. And in mature society, there are princi 
ples evolved which are of equal rights with the units. 

Laws have more than one effect; and any designed effect 
requires a simultaneous law-arrangement of two or more laws, 
to accomplish it; like compounds in medicine, and like the 
correcting lenses of the telescope. 

The more fit concrete and nearer, anv function, instinct, or 


organ is, to its proper direct action, the less must be the applica 
tion of balances or checks ; and vice-versa. 

We must remember the dualism, of even the good powers and 
orders, that exists everywhere in nature ; and which, in Soci 
ology, divides the representative powers, and requires laws to be 
double, to counteract each other's refractions. 

Duality runs through nature; in sexes; in centrifugal and 
centripetal powers ; in growth and decay ; in attraction and 
repulsion; in mind and body; in church and state; in two 
parties; in two kinds of chemical affinities; in two kinds of 
electricity ; in good and evil ; in day and night, &c. The dual 
ity we are speaking of, is not like that which Fourier speaks of, 
namely, one of alternation and subversion ; but it is a duality 
of concurrence and production, and is like the duality of sex 
which pervades all nature, and which perhaps originates from 
the same deep and hidden causes as sex itself. Everywhere, the 
world is propelled, and both things and thoughts begotten, by 
the duality of Resemblance and Contrast. 


1. Spontaneous combining powers. 

The spontaneous combining powers in society, act to combine 
both those that are alike, and also those that are opposite. 
These combining tendencies consist of two entirely different 
kinds. On the one hand, persons whose interests and feelings 
are alike, will join together more or less permanently. And on 
the other hand, those classes and races which are very opposite 
to one another, will naturally seek each other's society ; because 
of the good that each can do to and for the other, and because 
each supplies qualifications that the other lacks. This is the 
relation between the highly educated and the entirely ignorant. 
This also is the relation between the very rich and the very poor. 
It seems even to find a counterpart in the tacit peace between 
Roman Catholics and Quakers ; when they both perhaps are at 
" outs" with nearly all the other denominations. 

These sorts of combinations sometimes or frequently take a 
political form, and result in some of the most unexpected and 
reactionary movements in government. The Tories and the 
Radicals of England often unite with such results. These re- 


suits seem to follow also from other causes. Oftentimes men are 
found who take special pains to convince the world,- that they 
themselves are free from the prejudice that might naturally be 
expected in their class. Thus, the Commoner will take extra 
pains to show by his manners and sentiments, that he is not a 
u Plebeian" ; and with a similar ambition, the nobleman will 
espouse the interests and the measures of the poorest and most 
needy. Sentiments thus espoused in the first place out of mere 
love of approbation, become in time the sincere convictions of 
their hearts, or at any rate, the permanent policy of their lives. 
The result is also aided by this, that there are always some per 
sons who will become peculiarly' disgusted with other persons, 
for the very prejudices and errors with which they themselves 
have been most familiar, namely, those of their own class. And 
to become disgusted with our own evils is rather a good sign. 

A careful observer of society, soon perceives the mutual at 
traction between the highest and lowest classes. The American 
internal war, and indeed most other such wars, have been pro 
duced by a union of the very opposite classes of society. In 
fact, these two classes generally act together in England, as well 
as in this country. That same worldliness which is generally 
the cause and effect of splendid success in the fortunate, pro 
duces in the unfortunate, indolence and vice, which soon sink 
them to the lowest strata. That same worldliness produces, also, 
an inability to appreciate that which is best and -most interior in 
morals and religion, and a tendency to the showy and the exter 
nal ; hence there come certain moral sympathies between these 
opposite classes, far stronger and deeper than are commonly 
found from either, towards the middle classes. Then also, the 
distance is so great, that friction, collision, and even emulation 
and envy, are precluded. And then again, each of these classes 
can do for the other, what the other is most apt to need or to 
want, both in things that are right and also in things that are 

On the other hand, the highest and lowest live more nearly 
to nature, than the middling classes. The lowest live so, as a 
matter of course. The highest live so, because they are elevated 
above the comparative necessity for those restraints, both on pas 
sion and appearances and generosity, which trammel the middle 


classes. Neither party being much afraid of " society," and both 
being strongly set in their own way even by principles, the world 
fears them, respects them, and even tolerates in them, vices and 
oppositions which it would set itself against with crushing force, 
in the middle classes. 

The good order of society, requires the ultimate supremacy of 
the middle classes, in the actual administration ; but at least the 
equality with them of the highest and the lowest, in the consti 
tution and laws. But we know, that the exact opposite is often 
the real state of the case, and government is too often adminis 
tered by secret coalitions between a handful of the very highest, 
and the leaders of the mobs, and thus with the mobs themselves. 
2. Spontaneous quarreling powers. 

The quarreling powers depend somewhat, upon the oppositions 
of the combining powers just above mentioned. As human 
nature has so many faults, and as the faulty are least apt to 
bear with the faults of others, it soon arises that those persons 
and those classes ages and races, who are quite near together, 
both in interests and feelings, become prejudiced against each 
other personally, or become rivals in pursuits, and perhaps both. 
This occurs as soon as outward pressure is removed. And then, 
unless the relationship between them is maintained by very close 
bonds indeed, so as to form personal or corporation-friendships, 
the parties will become bitter enemies. Hence, ages races and 
classes who are near each other, are apt to quarrel among them 
selves, and form cliques in social intercourse, or parties in 


3. Spontaneous Reactionary powers. 

There is a class of latent, corrective, and oscillating, social 
powers. But the PRINCIPLES of the reaction lie deeper in 
nature than we can very easily explain. But one of its ele 
ments evidently is a love of novelty, or rather, a tendency to be 
fatigued by sameness, even of the best things ; and of course, 
much more so, by the worst things. By this law, an age of 
infidelity will sooner or later be succeeded by one of belief; an 
age of sham and form, by one of sincerity and spirit. Things 
after long disuse, will sometimes come up again with all the 
charm of novelty, added to their natural beauty. 

This is probably the same law that Comte hints at, when he 


mentions ennui,. as one of the bases of hope for the improvement 
of society. 

A notable instance of this law is, that " one of the latest nov 
elties in French journalism, is to make considerable use of the 
New Testament. Alexander Dulnas so thoroughly appreciated 
the love of novelty, which characterizes his countrymen, that, 
in one of his novels he incorporated a large part of one of the 
Gospels, with great effect. To many of his readers it was the 
newest part of his book." 

Again, take the case of children. Children suffer in conse 
quence of their parents' faults, both by general consequences, 
and by the particular consequence of the entailment of a heredi 
tary tendency to the same fault. This, under Christianity, causes 
the children to dislike the fault as a kind of inherited slavery. 
The sin in the parents, having been more or less voluntary, was 
guilt : but in the child, at first, the tendency or the fault not 
being of moral freedom, is not guilt, and so makes room for the 
possibility of more or less of self-developing cure, which, real 
guilt would perhaps not be able to accomplish. 

In human nature there are certain sympathies for the injured 
and the down-trodden, that will sooner or later arouse influences 
for their relief. Even if a class are so far down in the social 
and moral scale, as seldom to furnish to outward observers any 
instance of the nobler or better powers of human nature, if they 
are so low that FACTS can say but little in their favor; then FIC 
TION will take up their cause, and fancy will imagine and paint 
specimens of their imaginary heroes in unknown circumstances. 

The lower and more degraded the class really is, the more 
strange, the more picturesque, the more startling, and the more 
effective, the fiction will prove. It is in strict accordance with 
these great principles, or metaphysical laws of society, that the 
book called Uncle Tom's Cabin has had such a powerful influ 
ence in counteracting slavery. Similar tendencies worked in the 
Middle Ages, aiding in the emancipation of the European serfs. 

One of the principal features of modern fiction consists, in the 
exhibition of unexpected goodness in that unfortunate class of 
women, for whom general society seems to have no practical 
sympathy, and in regard to whom, those who have sympathy 
seem almost hopeless of any method to produce much practical 



good. But observe, the rise and prevalence of this kind of 
fiction, is exactly and immediately preceding a strong feeling 
among the leaders of some of the benevolent societies, that some 
thing can, and ought to be done for them, more than can be done 
by merely individual charity. The efforts of these benevolent 
persons, are as yet a mere imperceptible item in the hidden re 
cesses of society, doing little, and scarcely hoping much from any 
means at their command. But they are types and prophecies. 

The natural sympathy of society here at work, must be strictly 
distinguished from that morbid sympathy, which feels only or 
chiefly for the murderer or the criminal, and little useful 'sympathy 
for the victim ; a mere self-righteous sentimentalism sometimes, 
or an affectation of. singularity. The fact is, that confounding 
the poor outcast women, the victims of society, with those 
who make society their victims, namely, the robbers and swin 
dlers and real criminals, is one of the principal reasons why the 
criminals themselves cannot be ferreted out and punished. The 
defensive natural sympathies and powers of society, can only be 
claimed for criminals in so far as crime is the necessary result 
of misfortune and oppression ; which is not the case with most 
criminals in the United States. Moreover, the defensive natural 
powers of society, cannot be appealed to in any such a manner 
as to exclude society from the right to defend itself effectually, 
and by whatever means necessary, from its aggressors, those 
who are/enlisted in a selfish habitual and professional war against 
it, and against every victim, unfortunate enough to fall under 
their skill or power. 

4. Evils balancing each other. 

Evils will produce their effects in some manner. They often 
counteract each other: but not without producing special evils 
that would not follow from counteracting evil by good, or by 
the power of justice. This is well illustrated by McCosh on the 
Divine Government, and by a late book, " The Gospel of Good 
and Evil," of which some extracts are here quoted from "The 
Radical" for May, 1869. "Gambling is a species of mental 
exhilaration. The spirit of adventure is inherent, and bestows 
that peculiar i nerve which risks, encounters, and overcomes." 
" The petty vexations of life, and ebullitions of ill-humor, keep 
the passions in daily drill ; just as soldiers in peace keep up the 


martial spirit by drilling, by petty quarrels, duels, and wrangling 
brawls. Family-miffs are a grand institution for giving needful 
repose and after-exhilaration, to overtasked affection." " Tobacco 
narcotizes the baser passions and appetites, it lulls the BEAST to 
repose. Many an angry word and violent action are diverted 
from the wife and children, by the soothing action of the pipe." 
" The uses of fashion and vanity are found in their conservative 
influence upon morals ; and their propulsive power in human 
progress, makes them indispensable agents for good." "Slander 
springs from useful exuberance of the organ of self-esteem. 
What an ingenious contrivance is scandal, to give ebb and flood 
and never-ceasing movement, to the moral atmosphere ! With 
easy grace would unwatched virtue yield to temptation, and a 
sorry condition of society would ensue." " It is to the criminal 
propensities of man that we owe civilization. Crime first sug 
gests and compels men to organize, that a system of defense may 
be adopted against this evil." 

Alas, that the Radicals cannot make a better basis for civiliza 
tion, than the foregoing crime-begetting one. 

5. Equilibrity of sentiments. 

Another of the general social laws, is a certain instinctive 
tendency of the opinions, of an individual or of a society, 
towards a certain ideal equilibrium. In other words, one set 
of opinions tends to equilibrate another set of opinions ; that is 
to say, the dangers of one part of one's opinions are counteracted 
by the eccentricities of another part. The why and wherefore 
of this, it is not so easy to explain. Some might attribute it to 
their peculiar theory of the equilibritiveness of human character 
itself. They tell us that at bottom, there is very little difference 
of inward moral character between different persons notwith 
standing the differences of their outward characters. But, while 
this may be true of the spontaneous characters of races, of neigh 
borhoods, and of all hereditary classes, it can scarcely be true 
of those classes which are self-selected. However, the position 
is probably true as to the mere opinions and sentiments, (apart 
from the passionate actions), of the generality of men, in any 
given status of civilization. And, being true of the individuals 
generally, and the generality of individuals making the ruling 
sentiment of a locality, we may say that the aforesaid position 


is true of natural societies, precincts, and nations ; and this may 
therefore be a sufficient explanation of this equilibritiveness of 
the opinions and sentiments, that we are now speaking of. But 
it applies LESS directly to a corporation considered by itself. 

6. Calculus of Variations. 

The spontaneous reactionary powers, also the self-counter 
balancing of evils and of opinions, and all the equilibrata that 
we have pointed out, seem to show how the distant branches of 
mankind can never fly off from the general course, beyond cer 
tain limitations. In this respect, the study of these reactions is 
like La Grange's calculus of variations, which was invented pur 
posely and applied to show, that the variations in the orbits of 
our planets, which some astronomers feared, would sometime 
" endanger the stability of the solar system/' had limits, within 
the very same mechanical forces that produced them, sufficient 
to prevent those dire results, and in due time, to cause a reaction 
and return to former curves. There are limits, probably, even 
to the distance that lost souls can make, of separation from the 
race. The Psalmist says, although he " make his bed in hell, 
God is there." (Psalm cxxxix. 8.) And, vice-versa, what con 
cerns us more to know, there may be limits to the distance, the 
saved can rise above the lost. 


1. Real bonds of society. 

Society is held together by, and happiness in it depends upon, 
the following things, Love of the other sex, Acquaintanceship, 
Material or business interests, Education, its interests and its 
literature, Goodness, namely, doing justice to others, and for 
bearance under injustice real or apparent : 

Limitation of the habitable Earth. This becomes a stronger 
bond gradually, as population increases, and as barbarism and 
isolation become less possible, and thus the geographical limita 
tions force men into some society or other. 

Government and Laws. The comparative power of govern 
ment, as a bond holding society together in peace, decreases with 
the increasing limitations of the Earth by increase of population ; 
but its power FOR GOOD OR EVIL, correspondingly increases, as 
the possibility of escape from it decreases. 


The question how far we can have good government, depends, 
in part, on the amount and force of error and human infirmity, 
and not only on wickedness or sin, and hence there is special use 
of light and knowledge on the subject. 

Patriotism as a selfish NATIONAL feeling, is only a temporary 
bond, of isolated nations and of unsettled ages. Its foreign 
effects are as bad as its domestic are good ; therefore these nullify 
one another, and make it of no account morally in the highest 
view of the ultimate results. But the spirit of patriotism can 
easily be stimulated to act for one's own immediate neighborhood, 
as well as for one's nation ; and so, be made to act for both the 
centrifugal and centripetal forces of society. Yet still, its evil 
foreign effects entitle it to but little approbation. 

But patriotism as a self-sacrificing feeling of human love, 
such as naturally expands always to be co-extensive with national 
and human intercourse, is a very necessary element. 

In ordinary times, the offices whether of church or state, do 
not fall to the best men, but rather the reverse. All affairs when 
they become ordinary, are apt to become matters of business; 
and business matters are, well, we need not say what. But at 
any rate, there are necessary and higher elements, both in church 
and in state, than can possibly be made matters of business. 
Every one sees, this is true as to religion. But it is not so gen 
erally seen as to politics. And yet, it is just as impossible to 
conduct political affairs, without a high degree of patriotism, as 
it is to conduct religious affairs without a high degree of piety. 
And this high degree of patriotism in the one kind of officers, 
is just as necessary as the high degree of piety in the other kind. 

In ordinary circumstances, the conduct of political affairs 
becomes the net resultant of contrasting interests, embodied in 
conflicting parties, sects, avocations, and classes of society. Now, 
just imagine what a bedlam or pandemonium, a church is turned 
into, when it becomes merely the resultant, the prize, and the 
theatre, of such conflicting embodiments, or even of such con 
tending spirits. And the state becomes turned into its own pe 
culiar kind of a bedlam or pandemonium, when its living spirit, 
patriotism, is suppressed, and the embodiments of the other 
great passions and interests of men, rise to the top and swim in 
corruption, or sail in a hurricane of war; or both. 


2. Tests of a good social condition. 

Comte's general test of a true social system is, that it must be 
in harmony with itself, in all its parts, in all its details, and in 
all its consequences, as reasoned out by the finite mind. So 
impracticable indeed, is such a test, that Comte himself, in his 
arguments, treats it as if it must not only be consistent with 
itself; but that all its advocates and believers, as also its hypo 
critical assumers, must be in harmony with one another about it. 
But we will try to present a more practical view. 

(a) General Tests. Tho true objects of a government, and 
the true tests of a good social condition, are not form but spirit ; 

not any particular " ocracy," but the physical and moral 

good of the people in the long course of ages. The general aim 
is the greatest amount of permanent individual happiness to all, 
with the least suffering to any. For national without individual 
happiness is mere vanity. Special regard must be paid then, to 
all the conditions that contribute to the happiness of the Indi 
vidual Unit : Increase of population, early marriage, family 
harmony, respect for age by youth, vegetable diet in dense pop 
ulations, tillage, health and longevity, productiveness not too 
much in advance of the amount of productions wanted ; Econ 
omy in consumption, moral and physical improvement of the 
race, manifestation of the unity of interests between Individuals, 
classes, and societies ; men doing the right things from attrac 
tions, or freedom in motives and feelings, Independent benev 
olent study, as well as physical labor, made attractive, "Indi 
rect concurrence of the passions and inequalities which are now 
discordant," Feelings and ideas trained into habits in harmony 
with true interests, Variety of occupation, turning labor into 
exercise, Labor in groups or companies, Worthy and moral 
enjoyment for honest wealth, The settlement of new lands, 
regulated in so orderly and gradual a manner as to carry the 
comforts and blessings of civilization with it, Righteous dis 
tribution of rewards or payments to and among, capital, indus 
try, intellect, and morality; honesty and peace, giving the 
greatest inducements to industry ; and the lowest rate of interest 
for capital. 

(6) Tests in Morality : Faith, reverence, truth, and utility, 
being appreciated and held in the highest and in equal values, 


Certainty of rewards according to individual deserts, In- 
frequency of dishonesty and falsehood, and their ill-success, 
Amount of common virtue being enough to cause men to con 
tinue moral, whilst there is an ever increasing release from the 
need to labor, Harmonizing liberty with the qualifications to 
use it well, so that neither may be too far in advance of the 
other, General contentment with station and circumstances, 
consistent with religion, virtue, and education, High moral 
tone, especially for honesty and peace, both of officers and of 
laws, and of national conduct and character. 

(c) Tests in Fashions: Artificial refinements and consump 
tion, so far as are necessary to furnish employment for all. These 
are necessary in the proportion that the land can support more 
than it employs to work it ; and also in proportion to the human 
imperfections that need labor to prevent vice and waste of 
health. Fashions that will make honesty and industry, mar 
riage and healthy children, honorable, A fashion that will 
adopt as its luxuries, science, beauties of taste, and in general, 
"the products of much labor rather than of expensive mate 
rial ;" where the luxuries shall be in home-arrangements, " pic 
tures, furniture," &c., rather than in outward show, Where the 
number of the unnecessary things, and not their value, is the 
greatest, and where the things themselves are least injurious, 
Where the idle and luxurious persons (who require these lux 
uries), are the fewest in number, but where the many could get 
them honestly, if they did not already prefer better customs. 

(d) Tests as to labor : That all parties who are engaged in 
any work should have the fairest share of the profits ; that is, 
where labor, capital, science, and morals, come nearest to having 
each an equal share ; where the co-operative and mutual prin 
ciples are carried out to. their fullest extent to those who will re 
ciprocate, whether domestic or foreign parties, so far as can be, 
without receiving their vices, Where wages are remunerative, 
and the times of work reasonable, especially for women and 
children, Where the prices of products and the times of labor 
are least, in proportion to the cost of living, including both 
the necessaries of nature and the artificial innocent demands 
of custom. 

(e) Tests as to government : Where taxation is incidentally a 


means to the furtherance of all the aims mentioned above, 
Where government attempts especially to mitigate the evils of 
its own production, the inevitable results of the social organiza 
tion ; rather than to interfere with individual or local liberties, 
Where government cooperates in these good ends, by its own 
examples, officers, and laws, Where there are natural checks 
and balances really operative, and where the antagonistic forces 
of government are in due moral equilibrium, Where govern 
ment has the convictions of all classes of the people with it, 
Where government is a true representation of the feelings of 
all, and recognizes in due proportion, all the distinctions, and 
guards against all the prejudices actually in existence. Govern 
ment is a falsity, in proportion as it ignores (or pretends igno 
rance of) the distinctions and prejudices which society itself 
spontaneously develops. (In a republican government, all that is 
meant is, not class representation, but suitable laws to provide 
against any one class doing injustice to a weaker or less active 
or less numerous class ; and suitable forms to the same end) A 
proper representation and balance between the personal Units 
and Analytical Elements, namely Individual, Family, Precinct, 
and Corporation. (Freedom of Individuals is not possible, unless 
they have the privilege of segregating themselves, both in Pre 
cincts and voluntary corporations of their own preferences) 
Where government if republican, secures that the people shall 
be educated and trained properly for the functions of citizens. 
This requires, first, good family government ; second, that edu 
cation shall be of the judgment, and produce social wisdom, 
rather than be of all knowledge, or merely for worldly success ; ' 
third, that the true science of society should be held of the 
highest importance, and most properly taught, not only to the 
young, but also to the general public. 

3. The spirit, not the form. 

More importance Is usually attached to forms of government, 
and forms of election and forms of society, than is consistent 
with social prosperity. The spirit or principle should be the 
ultimatum. Any Nation or any society could be governed by 
an administration, partly composed of all three forms of gov 
ernment, as well as of one, provided such a society were char 
acterized by harmony and fraternization within, and by peace 


outwardly. Common sense instructs us, that the truth which 
applies to denominational distinctions of churches and forms, 
the truth that creeds or forms do not alter true Christianity, also 
applies to civil and political distinctions. So that, if we WILL 
idolize the forms, then our politicians and demagogues WILL 
make us pay for it. But there is no reason to hate or be jeal 
ous of other governments : only in that secondary sense that our 
jealousy causes them apprehension of aggression from us. 

The form should be allowed to develop from, and thus to suit 
the spirit. And the greatest care should be taken to preserve, 
in society and in government, a right spirit. But the ultimate 
intentions or aims, are not by any means what constitute the 
spirit. The spirit of any party is far more plainly exhibited by 
the means they are willing to use, than by their intentions or 
aims. And the higher a true civilization becomes, the more men 
must and will adhere to right and fair means, as well as to right 
and fair ends. Thus, the character of the means is the best test 
of the character of the spirit. 

Now, the means used are generally represented by forms of 
organization. For, in social affairs, the very first and mildest 
and most specious development of the wrong spirit, probably, 
takes place in an idolatrous attachment to usual forms. Such a 
refusal to progress, at once becomes a disease, and ends in social 
or political death. Hence, all forms of organization must undergo 
changes, and all old organizations must pass away and be fol 
lowed by new and different ones, if we would allow society to 
progress really. Nor will these changes be always nor usually a 
return to former ones, but often to entirely new ones, utterly 
unconceived of until the time towards their appearing. This 
applies of course, not only to voluntary societies, but also to all 
the forms of government. 

Says Wendell Phillips, (May 28, 1868); " It seems to me that 
organization is a mile-stone, which represents how far opinion had 
traveled when it crystallized into an organization. You cannot 
expect of * * * organization, necessarily in its shape as an 
organization, an acceptance of any NEW idea. As long as it can 
recognize its own place, and let you take yours, it is to be fellow- 
shipped, not as a force in the movement of society, but as a 
breakwater and anchor to keep what* we have gained." 


4. The New Reliances. 

Our new theory of Social Science may be compared with the 
old, as to its main dependencies, in the following respects. In 
stead of relying chiefly on lengthy details in profuse constitutions 
and laws ; our theory relies, partly, on a proper and national 
representation in laws and government, of all the principal active 
powers and constituencies ; and partly on more and more consti 
tuting special and voluntary organs for each particular kind of 
duty ; and partly on constituting the framework of government 
on the truly analytical Elements of human society, that is to say, 
on the philosophical Units of our Social Science. Or, to sum it 
briefly, our theory relies chiefly on the real powers, instead of on 
mere verbiage. And this, not so much by checks and balances 
of power, as by leaving to each its proper and natural duties. 

This new basis of reliance differs from the old in this respect : 
The old basis, exactly prescribing how everything shall be done 
proved and finished, is exceedingly simple in theory, but inex 
tricably complicated and uncertain in practice ; and is ever 
becoming more and more complicated, and more and more 
entangled, and is felt to be more and more defeating to the very 
objects of government : But the new proposed basis, whilst com 
plex in theory of organization, is simple in its practical appli 
cation, and ever tending to become more and more productive 
of the true ends of government. Like as in medicine, a philo 
sophical analysis of diseases, enables the practitioners to have 
easy work in their applications; but the brief axioms and 
phrases of " quacks," are apt to require all guesswork in their 
particular application. And what evils would happen under a 
scientific system, would manifest clearly and at once, where the 
fault or cause was to be found. Men and institutions would 
manifest their peculiar character with more simplicity, and thus 
they would each bear their own burden, whether of praise or 
blame, and would be revised accordingly. 


1. In General. 

For reasons previously stated, we cannot, as some do, make 
the theory and doctrines of progress swallow up the whole 
theory and classification of Social Science ; because those doc- 


trines are only to be obtained as the last and highest results of 
the science. Here it happens as in the case of Astronomy. At 
a certain advanced stage, the science came to a stand-still for 
want of more abstract analysis. Hence, the Differential and 
Integral Calculus were devised. Just so, the Dynamics which 
Comte and Spencer were seeking, cannot we think be found 
until some new and transcendental method of social analysis is 
arrived at. 

All that Comte argues for, can be accomplished by and in our 
Precincts. And after that, most of what Spencer argues for, 
may be applied to a national government including such Pre 
cincts. And in the mean time, many of Mr. Mill's views may 
be regarded as eminently practical for the transition state. 

" Order and progress both come from one and the same set" 
of suitable conditions of the corresponding forces. And of the 
two forces whose resultant is order and progress, one consists 
of imitativeness, the customary, and the moral, including the 
rational ; and the other consists of the governmental forces. 

" Between different stages of progress, there is a time of con 
fusion and chaos/' either of forces or of ideas or of both. And 
this is true, not only in general, but also in regard to progress 
in each particular point. 

The progress of society, is a process of life; only to be ex 
amined, by the principles and sciences of life. And divine 
morality is a process of world- wide and eternal life. 

In the early stages of society, the direct or immediate causes 
of action may be interests ; but the indirect permanent and deep 
causes are feelings. Nevertheless, the more society becomes en 
lightened intellectually, the more will interest become one of the 
real motives at the bottom, in all the contentions between the 
different classes of society, and between different localities. And 
interests work subtly in existing feelings passions and false rea 
sonings. Animosity against the "owners of cheap labor/' had 
as much to do with the cry for union and abolition, as sympathy 
for the colored race. 

2. Spencers Limitations. 

One of Mr. Spencer's principles is, that all evil results from 
the non-adaptation of constitution to circumstances. Admitting 
this, yet we ask, who shall say that education and charity and 


religion, are not some of the "circumstances" which are the con 
ditions of man's happiness ? and who shall say how much gov 
ernmental interference in business or sociaf details, might also 
be necessary to adapt him to his "circumstances" thus inter 
preted ? 

Again, Mr. Spencer says, Every man has freedom to do all 
that he wills, provided he infringes not the equal freedom of 
any other man. The principle is pretty, but we must watch the 
inferences. The error of the inferences as to the do-nothing 
theory, may be shown by an example, thus, Virtue is a neces 
sity and antecedent to social improvement. Virtue consists of 
three parts, namely, the outward action, the belief in the reason 
able utility thereof, and the moral internal will. Now, whilst 
government cannot reach the moral internal will, yet it must 
often touch the outward action, Why then, may it not also touch 
the intermediate thing, namely, the reasonable utility of virtue, 
and teach and encourage virtuous "rights," as well as encourage 
patent rights and copy rights, the latter of which Mr. Spencer 
is strongly in favor of. Not forcing good, but encouraging 
good, is what is asked for. 

But again, we say that Mankind and God have some rights 
in the matter of civil society, and that therefore, one man's free 
dom is not the only limit to another man's freedom. But this 
extensive subject must be postponed until we consider the rela 
tion of government to religion, which will perhaps form part 
of a future w r ork. 

Yet Mr. Spencer thinks that "the order of nature without 
law, should be left to decide these questions." If so, why may 
not the same order of nature without law, be left to carry on the 
whole business of government? "Do away with disturbing of 
arrangements," says he, " and allow things to take their natural 
course, and the best men will EVENTUALLY draw to themselves, 
respectful obedience." But we answer, sin and ignorance ARE 
" DISTURBING ARRANGEMENTS," and who shall say how many 
thousands of years yet, it shall be before their disturbing influ 
ences shall be removed, and the best men will draw to them 
selves -respect? And what is to become of mankind with all 
their miseries, in the mean time ? 

Nevertheless, there is a great truth underlying Mr. Spencer's 


theory; and it must be fully granted and kept distinctly in 
mind, that a human government should only interfere with 
human liberty, in the proportion to which itself and human 
nature, approach to perfection and righteousness; at least of 
those who control the government. The restrictions over the 
liberty of the citizen, should be only in proportion to the per 
fection of the ruling classes, individually and socially. 

Another principle to be demonstrated and acted upon is, that 
large and ample provision should be made to enable those per 
sons who feel themselves aggrieved by human society, to sepa 
rate themselves from it, or, as Mr. Spencer says, to exercise the 
" right to ignore the state," yet in such ways as that they should 
not endanger or disturb those who are satisfied. The necessity 
of some resources for dissenters and theorists to escape the inter 
ference of government, becomes all the more necessary in our 
system or theory, because we advocate considerable interference 
by proper Precincts and Corporations, in aifairs of education, 
morality, religion, &c., as will appear in the chapters on those 
subjects. The great error of government in all time, has been, 
attempting to force individuals to conform to its own peculiari 
ties, instead of merely to prevent individuals from disturbing 

In this connection appears one of the great uses of our small 
Precincts, also of voluntary communities and political corpora 
tions. To such, special privileges might be allowed according 
to circumstances. Just as the old Roman law allowed persons 
of the same various views and feelings, in certain cases, to in 
habit their own special Precincts and districts, and there to ad 
minister their own laws in their own way. Either our system 
for Precincts, or our system for Corporations, aifords all the right 
possibilities for individuals to " ignore the state" : but we cannot 
imagine any other systems that would. 

3. Periods of human progress. 

The elementary stages of human civilized society, must be 
characterized by vast accumulations of facts and of words, and 
by great memories. In this respect society must be like the in 
dividual. The infantile process of learning, is to perceive ideas 
intuitively or " by guess," and THEREBY to learn the meaning 
of words. But the adult process of learning, when the mean- 


ings of words are known, is to learn ideas from words. In the 
transitional age the two methods are more or less confused, 
and then the vivid memory of words is of value, to keep down 
the infantile process of guessing the meaning too soon. Hence, 
in the very early stages of a progressive society, considerable 
attention to words and MAXIMS must be expected, and some 
degree of excess thereof may be overlooked, as long as its heart 
is right, and its desire to learn is active. 

The critical or metaphysical stages of human progress, both 
individual and social, come next to be considered. The critical 
or metaphysical period of the individual mind, as also of society, 
is a necessary transitional period (as Comte observes, but in re 
gard only to society at large). It is the period of self-criticism, 
a period intervening between that improvement which is pro 
duced by other powers, and as it were by constraint, and that 
still more subsequent period, when habits have become second 
nature, and when the involuntariness of obedience, is not like it 
was in the first stage, a mere instinct and ignorant innocence, 
but has become in a degree positively virtuous, without being 
distinctly conscious that it is virtuous ; because, by reason of 
confirmation by habit, it no longer needs deliberate efforts of the 
will, or even self-conscious struggles against a contrary induce 

The fourth stage is one of confirmed good moral and intel 
lectual habits. It is also to be noticed, that the metaphysical 
stage is not possibly consonant with the highest or fullest efforts 
of the human mind, individually or socially; because it con 
tinually interrupts the thoughts of their objects, by intruding 
thoughts and feelings about the person himself, the thinker ; and 
thus in an intellectual point of view, hinders concentration. 
Moreover, the metaphysical stage or hatit, whilst it lasts, is 
necessarily productive of pride and thus of evil. But so far its 
the evil thus produced is necessary, it is not guilt ; and will in 
time reach towards its own cure. 

4. Progressions to be homogeneous. 

Practical suggestions for improvement, whether of the science 
or of society itself, should be offered in series or sets. Each set 
of improvements should be worked or taught a while, before 
going on with the next set. Each set should include references 


to all or most of the- matters wherein improvements are wanted, 
so far as they are apprehended. As one set of improvements 
may be necessary to prepare for others, or make them practi 
cable ; just so, the suggestions of the one set may be necessary 
to prepare people's minds to receive or judge of the next set. 
Hence it is, that in Social Science the historical facts them 
selves, are essentially connected with and must be coordinated 
with the science of them, in order to make desirable progress. 
To that end it is necessary, that improvements be suggested in 
somewhat like the order and proportions that society needs them. 
And equally so, it is impossible for the sociologists to foretell 
particular events far ahead, or in general terms to advise in ad 
vance, the true methods ; because the sociologist himself can only 
progress in his science practically, in something like the same 
proper order and proportions that society itself must follow. 
5. Who the coming leaders will be. 

One of the most general principles of the social motion is, 
that leaders will arise, and the generality of men will follow 
them. This will be so, whether any civil law exists or not. We 
see this in the power of fashion, and in the influence of example, 
all this world over. Here then we ask, what hope is there of 
good leaders arising to benefit society ? And leaders are a very 
different class of persons from rulers or drivers. They are an 
order of spiritual powers, like the old religious powers, as to 
morality ; but very different from them in their breadth and 
culture, both as to ideas and as to liberality. Comte has some 
good thoughts on this point. 

The new order of spiritual powers will be unlike the out 
grown order of the ecclesiastical, in another respect, "they 
will be humble." This consequence results from several causes, 
but chiefly these : the progress of all scientific investigation, is 
not one of absolute certainty, but avowedly only one of proba 
bility and of theory. And then, from this further cause, that 
these powers would obtain and maintain their influence and 
supremacy, not by material forces nor by supernatural terrors, 
but by .educating the people, cultivating their faculties, and dis 
seminating truths, tending ever more and more to bring the 
people up even with the advancing front of the leaders them 
selves. In other words, the very method by which Social Science 



rules, is, by ever lessening the moral and intellectual distance 
between its professors and the public. Thus the new order of 
spiritual powers, it is hoped, will be humble. 

When Comte comes to the question, who the new leaders will 
be, or how they will arise, he gives up the problem as insolvable. 
But we suspect, that much of what has been said in the first part 
of this Introduction, can be readily applied to this part, and 
therefore need not be recapitulated here. Many of the persons 
of whom we have already spoken as the helpers of Social Sci 
ence, are only so indirectly as it were, or unintentionally ; inas 
much as the works in which they are directly and intentionally 
engaged, are frequently the improvement of society itself, rather 
than of the science. 

Furthermore we suggest, perhaps the coming leaders, like the 
best preachers, will be those who can succeed best in inducing 
society to hate its sins and evils most, and to forsake them most 
abidingly. In such work, not only good spirit good talent and 
virtue are necessary, but also a good example, and a good life 
toward society, an abnegation of self, by devotion to Mankind. 
Perhaps the great practical social reformers of modern times, 
may be indicative of something about the origin of this class of 
the spiritual powers; also the founders of Roman Catholic 
houses in various ages, the modern co-operating capitalists, and 
aM earnest thinkers and sympathizers on the great social prob 
lems, who have faith enough in their theories, to live up to 
them, and to sacrifice present self for others and for the future 
self. In the long range of history, the lessons of failure become 
almost as instructive as the lessons of success. Whenever the 
generality of such leaders would arrive at one general and uni 
form theory, there would arise a profoundly respected social 
power ; and so in proportion as they tend towards such a general 
theory. At any rate, the main impetus of their influence need 
not await until after educating all the people highly, for the 
generality of people are moved more by feeling or affection than 
by reasoning. 


1. In General. 

We have now come to what we suppose to be one of the most 
original and valuable parts of our theory, namely, that human 


society and therefore Social Science, each consists of six funda 
mental elements, or Units ; namely, Individual, Family, Social 
Circle, Precinct, Nation, and Mankind. 

Both Aristotle and Hegel seem to admit, with almost the 
force of our idea of Units, three great ideas, the Family, the 
Precinct [or commonwealth] and the Nation, and Mulford 
seems to regard them as THE three " distinctive" forms of so 
ciety, (chap. 16), the Family having "organic," and the com 
monwealth, " formal," but yet necessary relation to the Nation. 

Mulford, however, does not neglect to place the Individual in 
some degree of prominence. Thus, if we may call his first thir 
teen and last two chapters, the abstract relations of the Nation, 
then the intermediate chapters are the concrete relations of the 
Nation. These (concrete) are given in the following order, 
Individual, Family, Commonwealth, Confederacy, Empire. Ac 
cording to Mr. Mulford as we understand him, the "Nation is 
the friend of the first three, namely, Individual, Family and 
Commonwealth," but (as we understand him) the antagonist of 
the other two. This is coming very near to the doctrine of 
fundamental elements or units ; nevertheless, the idea does not 
seem to have suggested itself to him. On the contrary, p. 276, 
he says explicitly, " The Family is not the unit of society," 
and nothing but the Nation has his high term " moral person 
ality," which is his equivalent for our term Unit. 

Others also, have singled out Family, Church and State 
merely, as the great divisions of Social Science, with such pre 
eminence as shows they unconsciously regarded them as tanta 
mount to our idea of the Units, yet without connecting these 
divisions by any general theory, or by the relation of fun 
damental elements. But church is a corporation and not a 
natural person, and State is only an abstract term for the 

But not only the Individual and the Nation are natural per 
sons, but every one of the essential elements of our analytics 
is a natural person, namely, Individual, Family, Social Circle, 
Precinct, Nation, and Mankind. 

On the contrary, the assumption by a Nation, that it is the 
source or origin of all political power, is high presumption be 
fore Heaven, and a usurpation of the rights of the Almighty 


and Divine Creator. And this is so, whether the presumptuous 
government is of Belshazzar or of Nebuchadnezzar, or of a de 

Of one thing we may be sure ; government, to be permanent, 
must be homogeneous in its essential elements. If Precincts were 
only recognizable as artificial persons or corporations, then there 
could be no permanent peace and order in society, until the Na 
tion itself were recognized as only a corporation. So, on the 
other hand, the Nation, as a local organism distinct from cor 
poration, can never be satisfactorily dispensed with, unless all 
the under or local departments, namely, the Precincts, can also 
be dispensed with. This would mean, a people joined together 
as a grand corporation instead of as a Nation, and consisting 
exclusively of sub-corporations, abstract from locality, a con 
ception too indefinite and too general to be judged of, without 
further experience in the parts of the system separately. And 
again on the other hand, a Nation can never enjoy its full rights 
as a God-given " moral personality," only as it recognizes the 
moral personality of the Precinct also. The law of personality 
is, as Mulford says, " be a person and respect other persons" ; and 
we add, respect them, however small or humble they may be. 
2. Origin of this Theory. 

It may be appropriate here, to state simply how our theory 
of the Units originated. The Units, (or most of them) were 
arranged as the best possible division of the subject we could 
devise, merely as divisions of the study, before their functions as 
units were clearly conceived. And here arises one strong argu 
ment for this number and classification of the units, namely, 
that the arrangement is necessary, in order to classify the mate 
rials of Social Science. 

But our theory not only makes our divisions logical or sub 
jective divisions of the science, but also fundamental elements 
of society itself. 

Comte had stated that the Family is the true unit of society, 
and not the Individual. This struck us at once, as a favor 
able idea. But when we reflected, as Paley says, that all that 
nations and societies suffer or enjoy, is not felt in the bulk, but 
only in the Individuals, we perceived that the Individual cannot 
be given up as a unit ; hence, then, we have at least t.wo units, 


namely, the Individual and the Family. And when once the 
fact, that there must be a PLURALITY OF UNITS, was assumed, 
and what the first two are, the way was opened to reach the true 
and full number of them. Nation and Mankind soon occurred, 
as two other units at the other extreme. Then the rights of 
States or minor localities, and of voluntary corporations, had to 
be placed somewhere between the extremes already ascertained. 
This problem was insoluble, except by a theory of the Tribe 
which should make the principle or spirit of Tribe survive in 
modern society, under differentiated forms, namely as Social 
Circle and Precinct, as natural unalterable elements, and Cor 
poration as an artificial element and therefore as a distinct genus 
from all the six previously obtained, not itself a unit but a type 
of a unit. See CORPORATION, for a fuller account. 
3. Some Singular Sixes. 

We present here a few classifications of nature, by sixes, which 
by analogy tend to show that we have hit upon and discovered 
the right number of, and the right particular units, of which 
society really and virtually is composed. Most of these classi 
fications presently to follow, are numbered so that all the I 7s may 
be compared together, and all the 2' s , and so on. And we hope 
none of these our analogies, will be thought to be any wilder 
than some of Fourier, or Comte or Hobbes or others who have 
labored in this department of imaginary thought. 

The figure which gives the maximum amount of internal 
content, with the minimum amount of external surface of sim 
ilar bodies joined together, is a HEXAGON ; as, for instance, the 
cells of the bee. 

In developed civilization, there are six great classes of society. 
They help in forming Social Circles, and they give the bases of 
limits of, and highest moral shares of property, in distribution. 
These will be portrayed in another book. 

The errors and vices of Mankind^ have instinctively and 
spontaneously alighted on our six units, as the fundamental 
motors of human passions. Nearly all the " respectable" crimes 
and great enormities, are committed for the sake of, and under 
the perverted infatuation of, one or the other of these ideas that 
we have singled out and generalized under the name of units of 
society; namely, either for the rights of (1) the Individual, or 



of (2) the Family, or of (3) Social Circle, class, and clan, or of 
(4) one's own Precinct or Neighborhood, or (5) of Nationality, 
or for (6) the welfare of Mankind, including under Mankind, 
as we do, religious action in society, which plants itself on that 
wide human ground, for the justification of social compulsion 
and religious persecution. 

Roget classifies his " Thesaurus of English Words" into six 
Main Divisions, thus, Abstract Relations, Space, Matter, Intel 
lect, Volitions, Affections. 

Ballou (in Practical Christian Socialism, p. 108) has six in 
finities ; namely, the Deific spirit, the soul-spirit, matter, space, 
duration, diversity. 

Paley's Divisions of Moral and Political Philosophy, are the 
following : 

1 Preliminary Considerations. 

2 Moral Obligations. Origin of, &c. 

3 Relative Duties of Persons and Property. 

4 Duties towards Ourselves. 

5 Duties towards God. 

6 Elements of Political Knowledge. 

Spencer's lines of progress, are readily made into six, thus: 
1 Advance from Qualitative to Quantitative. 
2 Advance from Concrete to Abstract. 

3 Application of abstract to new orders of concrete. 

4 Simultaneous advance in generalization and specialization. 

5 Increasing subdivision and re-union. 

6 Constantly improving Consensus. 

Our classification of the sciences : 

1 Perceptible Mechanical Powers. 

2 Imperceptible Mechanical Powers. 

3 Imponderable Powers. 

4 Animal Powers. 

5 Human Transcendental Powers. 

6 Supernatural Powers. 

Our Units. 
1 Individual 

Systems of 
1 Monometric 

1 Satellites 

2 Family 
3 Social Circle 

2 Dimetric 
3 Trimetric 

2 Planets 
3 Suns 

4 Precinct 
5 Nation 

4 Monoclinic 
5 Triclinic 

4 Groups 
5 Clusters 

6 Mankind 

6 Hexagonal 

6 Nebulse 




Organs of sense. 

1 Sensation 

2 Temperature 

3 Taste 

4 Smell 

5 Hearing 

6 Sight 

Universal Data. 

1 Force 

2 Motion 

3 Matter 

4 Time 

5 Space 

6 Unknowable Power 

Suggestions from 
Okeris Classification. 

1 Living Nature 

2 Creations of Elements 

3 Functions of Elements 

4 Cosmogony 

5 Material Totalities 

6 Immaterial Totalities 

Religious Society. 

1 Adam 

2 Adam and Eve 

3 Patriarchy 

4 Israel in Egypt 

5 Israel in Palestine 

6 Christian Church 

Mental States. 

1 Physical Emotion 

2 Conception 

3 Idea 

4 Thought 

5 Metaphysical Emo 


6 Will 

Plato" 1 s Sciences. 

1 Arithmetic 

2 Geometry. Plane 

3 Geom. three dimen. 

4 Astronomy and Mo 


5 Harmonics 

6 Real Existence 

Mental Faculties. 

1 Consciousness Ex 


2 Consciousness In 


3 Association of Re 


4 Association of Con 


5 Abstraction 

6 Generalization 

Comtds Classification 
of the Sciences. 

1 Mathematics 

2 Astronomy 

3 Physics 

4 Chemistry 

5 Physiology 

6 Sociology 


1 Logic 

2 Mechanics 

3 Physics 

4 Organic Physiology 

5 Psychology 

6 [The Idea] ? 

4. Combinations of the Six Units. 

(a) Combinations in Concatenation. Each personal unit of 
society, contains a subdivision or principle which points to, or 
connects with, the unit next above it. The Individual has 
sexual functions, and these point to the Family. The Family 
has grand-parents, and gives out brethren and sisters to make 
new friendly Families, these give rise to Social Circles. And 
these seek to reside in near neighborhood, and thus become Pre 
cinct. And these again, multiplying, constitute Nation. 

In the development of society, society comes to self-conscious 
ness and to the understanding of itself, only by means of the 
light which each one unit throws upon the character of the 
others. By spiritualizing Goethe's great saying, that man knows 
himself only as he knows external nature, we will readily see 
how, in the origin of human society, the individual man or 


woman only knows himself or herself, after organizing into the 
Family relation. And likewise, one Family alone does not (or 
would not) know itself, only by becoming a Social Circle or a 
tribe, viz., only after several Families had come to exist in the 
same neighborhood, and thus spontaneously to have formed a 
tribe So likewise, the tribe could not understand itself fully 
nor be really developed, only by coming into relation with sev 
eral tribes, that is, by becoming part of a Nation ; or, the one 
tribe growing and dividing into several tribes. So likewise, the 
Nation cannot understand its true functions, only by realizing 
its position as a part of the great Family, Mankind. 

And now, in the advanced stages of society, when new organs 
are put forth, and new settlements and new developments resolve 
the tribe into two distinct branches, one, the preferred acquaint 
ance (namely, the Social Circle) and the other, the Precinct of 
nearest or lowest degree of local government, we must reduce 
.our argument to adapt it to modern conditions, and then say 
thus : The Individual knows himself only by coming to the 
Family; and both Individual and Family know themselves 
only by coming both into the Social Circle, or into the local 
organization or Precinct ; and all these again, comprehend them 
selves only by their relations with the Nation; and it again, 
can comprehend itself only by means of its relations to Man 

Furthermore, as Nation and Precinct, Social Circle and 
Family, are all Individual human beings, these general princi 
ples will hold when applied beginning with the Nation and 
going downwards. Any organization of men can understand 
itself only by understanding and appreciating the elements of 
which it is composed, and with which it most constantly comes 
into relationship and contact. So then, the Nation can under 
stand itself only by appreciating Precinct, Social Circle, and 
Individual. So also, the Precinct can only understand itself, 
by appreciating all the units below it ; and so on for the rest. 
Thus it is, that the very principle which runs through the de 
velopment of all human society, has only to be viewed from the 
opposite side, to be seen to confirm the great doctrine of the 
right of some government influence being vested in all the units 
of society severally. 


(6) Combinations in Solution. We now come to combinations 
of a more complex and versatile kind. 

In the development of Society, society combines its elements 
variously ; hence we observe that three of them, namely, Pre 
cinct, Nation, and Mankind, involve the idea of locality and 
are dependent upon the location, and so might be called the local 
units or units of locality. But the other three units are entirely 
independent of the idea of locality, and are purely personal, 
namely, the Individual, the Family, and the Social Circle. 

Again we observe, that these six naturally divide themselves 
into three pairs, in each of which pair, one unit is a part and 
the other a whole, namely, Individual and Family, Precinct and 
Nation, Social Circle and Mankind. Furthermore, in each of 
these pairs, one unit is related to the other, not only as part to 
whole, but the relationships are evidently much alike in several 
metaphysical and moral respects, one pair being personal, one 
political, and one, moral or voluntary. 

And then again, we have three pairs by a different combina 
tion, such that the two of each pair are connected closely 
together by metaphysical and moral relations and considera 
tions ; thus, one pair consists of Individual and Mankind. 
Another pair is of Family and Nation. And the third pair is 
of Social Circle and Precinct. 

We observe also three dualities. First, the whole six are 
divided into two threes ; next, the whole six are divided into 
three twos; and third, the division "itself of these two views is 
the third duality. 

(c) Analogy in Chemistry. All the elements of chemistry 
may be divided into two classes, and in three different methods. 
One, is into Metals and Metalloids, another, is into Acids and 
Alkalies, and the third is into Electro-negative and Electro 
positive. We have here as much of the divisions of our six 
units, as could be expected to survive under chemical analysis, 
under which NO LIFE can continue. Here in chemistry we 
have, not three pairs of classes making six classes, but only 
three WAYS of pairing classes. 

(d) Analogy in Geography. Here is another class of natural 
analogies of our six units, found in the relations of the six great 
geographical divisions of the world, called continents. In the 


northern hemisphere we have three continents, namely, North 
America, Europe and Asia. And then we have three southern 
continents, South America, Africa and Australia. Then in 
another view, we have them in pairs thus, North America and 
South America, Europe and Africa, Asia and Australia. Thus 
much Steffens and Guyot have observed ; but we add some other 
twos and threes. Thus, as to the shape three of them (North 
and South America and Africa) are shaped like "legs of 
mutton" ; and the other three of them (Europe, Asia, and Aus 
tralia) are nearly like irregular oblongs or trapezoids. Again, 
viewing them in pairs, one pair, Europe and Asia, are joined 
together arm in arm or side and side, by a range of mountains. 
Another pair, North America and South America, are joined 
together by a long narrow isthmus. And the third pair, namely, 
Africa and Australia, are alike only in being unlike the others 
in that respect; just as Individual and Mankind are unlike 
each other, and unlike all the rest of the units, for Africa is 
joined, not to the continent immediately north of it but to the 
one on the east, and not by an isthmus so much as by a broad 
flat territory, and by a long narrow sea : whilst Australia is 
unlike the others, by being solitary. Then, leaving Australia 
out of the question as solitary, and corresponding to the Indi 
vidual (as was done by former geographers,) we have all the 
rest of the earth divided into two parts called the old World 
and the new World, having the very peculiar contrast, as the 
geographers have remarked, that the new World is long and 
narrow, and has its greatest length running north and south ; 
and the old World, although much larger in one direction than 
the other, yet cannot be called narrow, and has its greatest length 
east and west. The old World has its long slopes and plateaus 
towards the north, and the new World has its long slopes towards 
the east. 

And now, if we count the Individual, as the solitary one corre 
sponding to Australia, we have five other units. Three in the 
old World, namely, Family, Social Circle and Precinct, and two 
in the new World, namely, Nation and Mankind. 

Again, observe another analogy of peculiarities, a solitary one 
at each end of the six ; and two closely connected pairs between 
them. Individual and Mankind are two extremes, which in a 


certain sense are different from society; one is a no society, and 
the other is an ideal that is never completed. But the other 
four make two pairs closely connected, namely, Family con 
nected with Social Circle, and Precinct connected with Nation. 

Now, let us observe this geographical analogy, in mere figures, 
expressing the ratio of coast lines to each 1000 square miles of 
continent; and on the proportion of which, intercourse and 
civilization so much depend. (See Mankind.) The figures 
stand thus, 6f ; 4, 3J; 2f, 2J; If. Europe's figure is 6f, and 
Africa's If. But, between these, there are two pairs, whose 
figures come pretty nearly together. Thus, one pair is North 
America 4, and Australia 3J : the other pair is South America 
2|, Asia 2J. 

The foregoing analogies of course, are only to show in a cumu 
lative way, a probability of our six as an important number of a 
true classification in social science. 


1. In General. 

We have now come to express formally that part of our 
theory, which is the doctrine of the necessity of the perpetual 
balance of the units, in order to make a happy people, or a 
good and righteous government. What we mean, is no Pan 
theistic or development-idea, that these units WILL ultimately 
balance each other. But we mean, that the duty of society is to 
make the balance, and to give to each unit its due proportion of 
influence ; and that, only in proportion as society does this, can 
it produce either a happy people, or a good government. 

The necessity for preserving this balance, might be legiti 
mately inferred from their nature as units ; so that the estab 
lishment of the theory in general, of the units, involves in it 
the necessity or duty of their balance. This necessity and duty 
may also be inferred from their combinations. For, in all the 
departments of nature, we cannot have substances composed of 
elements, only when these elements are in their due proportions 
to each other, and also are existing in the necessary contiguity. 
Unless the parts are real, the whole cannot be real. 

But these, as positions are very abstract; and as it is very 
important to establish this doctrine of the balance of the units, 


upon clear and well-known grounds, we desire the reader's at 
tention to a few direct arguments and illustrations on this point. 
And to the elucidation of which, we propose to devote most of 
the remainder of th's Introduction. 

2. Individual and Family as Types. 

If our type theory (already illustrated) is as good as we sup 
pose it to be, it ought to help us to solve the still more difficult 
theory of the balance of the units. And the analogies are at 
hand. Just as the heart the lungs the stomach and the brain, 
are each a vital organ, and act each independent of the others ; 
yet life and health absolutely depend on the free action of each 
exerting its own due balancing power, so it is with the elements 
of society. So again, for another illustration, to refer to the 
Family as type of society, the masculine and feminine elements 
must co-exist in harmony in their mutual work, and yet, each 
must maintain its own individuality, in a due balance. 
3. Resemblances to Gravitation. 

The power of association it is true, draws men together like 
the law of gravitation, with a force in proportion to their num 
bers or mass, and in inverse proportion to their distances. But 
this law, when transferred from inanimate matter and applied 
to humanity or to living beings, requires several modifications. 
And even among the astronomical bodies, there is a centrifugal 
power always exactly equal to the centripetal. 

If we turn to the sidereal systems for illustrations, then Na 
tions will answer to solar systems, prettily and truly. Planets 
will revolve around suns, moons and satellites around planets, 
and so on ; each in its own orbit, and doing its own work ; and 
each kept from centrifugal disorder, by the attracting power of 
its own immediate center, namely, tho next highest orb in the 
generalizations. But still, it is in vain to look for exact analo 
gies of life-processes, in the laws or actions of inanimate matter. 
Saturn's ring may illustrate the relations of Families to a tribe ; 
but we have no binary systems in our solar system, nothing to 
illustrate the Family organization in the relation of male and 
female. Although in the binary systems of far distant stars, 
the suns of other systems, we have the beautiful arrangement of 
two companion stars revolving around each other, or rather, re 
volving around an ideal center, the ideal point of their mutual 


attraction ; and each being of the color needed to complement 
the other in the spectrum. And in some cases, there appear to 
be more than two, sometimes even several suns, occupying these 
relations to each other. But not in the simple organic matters 
substances or minerals, do we find any trace of male and. female, 
other than electricity. It is only where we enter into the living 
world, vegetable as well as animal, that we find sex running 
throughout all or nearly all life ; but we find the Family or 
ganization, only in a few of the very highest animals. 

Now, let us remember that in the natural formation of society, 
after the formation of Families and tribes, the centripetal and 
centrifugal forces are not exerted and felt, so directly between 
the Individuals as between the Families, or the tribes. Nations 
are formed originally and in all history, not by Individuals but 
by Families and tribes. Thus, even the centripetal force itself 
is not so much directly between Individuals, as it is directly 
between Families and tribes. And the sun over our heads does 
not draw us away from the earth, but draws us along with it. 

Where the two forces of human society, the centripetal and 
the centrifugal, are most perfectly and independently balanced 
in" all their forms, where the national, the neighborhood, the 
Family, and the Individual, all have the powers of each in the 
best balance^ there will be the most rapid and true prosperity. 
And this is brought about in accordance with one of the laws 
which Mr. Carey has announced in only one of its relations, 
namely, in the relation of city state and Nation, rather than to 
its full extent. This law might and should be enlarged, as I 
have enlarged it, to the other units. That law thus enlarged is, 
that in proportion as this balance of all the parts is preserved, 
the rapidity of human diversity or individuality is promoted ; 
and in proportion to that individuality, will be the feeling and 
consciousness of human responsibility intellectual and moral; 
and in proportion to the responsibility both intellectual and 
moral, will be the activity and morality ; and in proportion "to 
the activity and morality in such a condition of balanced free 
dom and order, will be the universal prosperity. 

4. Resemblances to Chemical affinity. 

But the relation of persons in small districts, is much better 
illustrated by the powers and laws of chemical affinity. Here 


we see that the attraction between molecules or Individuals when 
placed very near together, becomes an entirely different power 
from gravitation, as far as we can yet perceive ; and one that 
exceeds it beyond all possibility of comparison. So that al 
though all bodies undergoing chemical changes, are also subject 
to gravitation, yet we cannot perceive that the chemical changes 
themselves are at all affected by gravitation. Here we have 
illustrated the absolute independence of neighborhoods within 

This principle of elective affinity illustrates another feature, 
both of man and of society, or of close neighbors to each other, 
whether in space or in relationship ; and this is, that molecules 
or Individuals can unite with each other, only within certain 
definite specified and limited proportions. So it is with Indi 
viduals ; each one has his own peculiar character and his own 
proper rights, such that other Individuals cannot understand him 
nor his true character or responsibilities, beyond certain degrees. 
And these degrees may vary in different subjects, so that any two 
persons may have more and closer affinities on some subjects 
than on others. Here we have illustrated the eternal rights of 
Individuals, in the recesses of their own hearts, and to their own 
hearts' secrets, as well as to combinations and sympathy with 
other persons. 

As Comte well observes, the attempt or even the hope, to 
reduce all the operations and laws of nature, to one law, is and 
will be a vain attempt. And the fact is, that the laws and powers 
which attract men into Nations, are not the same as far as we can 
analyze, as those which cause them to seek the society of and 
organization with their immediate neighbors. The one is gravi 
tation, the other is affinity. And hence, the national principle 
and the neighbor principle, are much better illustrated by what 
are recognized to be two entirely different natural powers, and to 
be working by entirely different laws. 

One obvious inference from this view is, the evident and 
much greater importance of the neighbor-attraction, than of the 
nation alone, in itself considered as the ultimate object sought, 
the end of the means ; and including in the> term neighbor, not 
only Precinct, but also social acquaintance and business circle 
or chartered company. 


By reference to Mr. Carey's law regarding the balance of 
centralization and decentralization, it will be observed, that all 
turns upon t individuality and personal responsibility, that the 
national power itself is useful, only as it develops or allows 
the development of these. Whereas, the chemical affinities are 
the immediate and direct operation of these individualities 

5. Natural History of Society. 

One element of the centrifugal force of society, is the innate 
feeling of human liberty, and the necessity in order to happi 
ness, for each individual to follow his own bent or inclination. 
The more condensed society becomes, and the more varieties 
of occupation study and training are introduced, the more dif 
ferent the various persons 7 bents or inclinations become, and the 
more absolutely essential for each one's happiness, becomes his 
right to have great liberty in those respects. And the same 
holds true both for Individuals and for Families. And thus 
the centrifugal forces become electrical repulsion, nay more, they 
become biological and medical, and instead of centrifugal forces 
we have incompatible characters. 

Another law is the attraction of the sexes. Here we have an 
attraction, often not in inverse but in direct proportion to dis 
tances, and according to the great differences and co-ordinating 
needs of each sex for the other. Distances, in space or in social 
position, are little in comparison with the power of this great 
attraction. Then again, when this attraction becomes chemical, 
and finds its combination and fulfills it with the rising Family, 
it forms the very strongest tie and gives the very strongest com 
bination in human society. Now, it is here too, that there arises 
the very strongest centrifugal and repulsive force. Each Family 
tends to repel every other Family. This is chiefly the result of 
the antipathy or dread, of men for men, or women for women, 
in regard to those of the other Families. 

This centrifugal tendency also results, from the autocratic in 
fluence which parents naturally desire to exercise upon their own 
children, and from their dread of or opposition to the influence 
of other Families on their children. 

Out of the necessities of Families, there soon arise Social 
Circles Precincts and Corporations ; the consideration of which 


is deferred a few pages, namely, until we come to the subject 
headed " The Tribe Principle." (Chap. VIII.) 

Oftentimes in history, conquests have been useful in causing 
tribes or Precincts that were previously at war and entirely 
under centrifugal influences, to submit to a centralizing attrac 
tion. But no such centralizing force as is compulsory, can be 
justified, until after tribes Precincts or Nations placed in juxta 
position by providential circumstances, refuse to enter peaceably 
into such confederation as is necessary for peace and order, re 
fuse to conform to +he centripetal attractions required by cir 
cumstances. Then, the arising of the strongest tribe or of some 
foreign power, as a centripetal power, seems justified by the ne 
cessities of the case, and by the interests of Mankind. 

An overwhelming tendency to centralization seems now to 
exist all over the civilized world, except temporarily in the 
Southern states, where the decentralizing movement w r as made 
evidently for a special and exceptional purpose, namely, of form 
ing a new center of despotism over a part of its own people ; and 
was not a movement made upon any well founded principle of 
decentralization. Its theories of Precinct rights were held good 
only for the white man's, not for the negro's Precincts. And its 
theories of state rights were only held to be good against the old 
government, and not against the new. Its power against its own 
parts, was far more threatening, than that of Great Britain to 
wards the American colonies in the Revolution. Its people had 
forgotten about ninety years of history. They had forgotten that 
the early colonists mostly had been driven to a new country by 
persecution or distress. Whereas the settlers in the Southern 
states had been invited and encouraged and aided by the general 
government, in every way, and fostered to become great and 
prosperous states. 

The advent of the constitution of the United States, there 
fore, was a return to the original and natural balance of society. 
It speaks of " We, the people," as well as states ; and thus ac 
knowledges a double power in its' very inception, the people 
the Nation as a whole, forming the centripetal force ; and the 
former tribes or colonies, now states, forming the independent 
or centrifugal powers. 

One of the great practical problems in Social Science, is to 


determine how much Individual and Family liberty, each ought 
to resign and assign to the governing powers, and especially to 
the tribe, or district or company. Another of the great practi 
cal problems in this relation of centrifugal to centripetal forces, 
is, to find how much power and liberty the tribe or district or 
company should assign to the central government, and how much 
it should retain for itself. The safe general rule seems to be, 
that so far as the principle is concerned, men, Families, or tribes, 
only resign to government those rights which are necessary and 
only so far as necessary, to the accomplishment of the general 
and mutual objects. But yet, that in the practical and actual 
administration of government, the superior power (that is, the 
more general) must be the judge, as to the actual administration, 
in cases of doubtful rights, and also in cases of expediency not 
conflicting with rights. Because, the contrary supposition would 
be unreasonable ; that is, it would be unreasonable to suppose, 
that if the right were doubtful, or the expediency remain to be 
proved, the more general power should be subordinate to the 
less general. Whereas, as to absolute and undoubted rights, it 
is simply absurd to suppose them to be irrecoverably and upon 
principle, transmitted to any second party or second Unit, what 
ever be its power. 

In speaking as above, of assigning or resigning power to gov 
ernment, it is not meant that government actually arose in that 
way, nor to ignore the authority of God in civil government ; 
but only to exhibit that method, as one of the means of arriving 
at what the ordinance of God is in the matter. 


1. In General, and classifications. 

As in the Unit the Family, we have to consider it in two en- 
tirely diiferent aspects, so in the tribe, we have to consider IT in 
three subdivisions, each of which, now comes logically to be 
viewed as a fundamental and essential element. Now, when we 
take this tribe principle as thus analyzed, and apply it to modern 
civilization, we see that there arise three diiferent functions or 
kinds of organization, namely, (1) Precinct or Neighborhood, 
(township, ward or county, as the case may be,) (2) Social Circle 
or acquaintance, consisting in friendship, and providing for and 



looking towards new families, (3) organized voluntary associa 
tion, that is, lawful corporation for special purposes, corpora 
tions for business and corporations for politics, &c. 

The casual reader will here observe a kind of confusion in 
our treatment of Corporation. For, in our main original classi 
fications, we place Corporation, not among the expressly ascer 
tained units, but as a separate class. The confusion arises from 
the subject, consists of the confluence of the things in tribes, 
and is explained by the fact, that our theory anticipates, that in 
the future the corporation will more and more take the place of, 
and fulfill functions of civil government ; or at least, that there 
is a possibility and a practicability that it may do so, and that 
all the three elements of the tribe, tend towards a re-integration 
in their primal form, but in a renewed and Christian spirit. 
2. Permanence of the Tribe Principle. 

The Tribe, as an element of society, although a unit in the 
early ages of Mankind, and of each Nation in particular, yet 
soon disintegrates or differentiates into heterogeneity ; and as to 
its form, so far disappears from visibility in modern society, as to 
require to be considered as a PRINCIPLE rather than as a unit. 

In general, the tribe, according to ancient history is the origi 
nal foundation of political government, being the immediate 
successor of the patriarchy. Nor does it ever lose its power (in 
a transcendental sense), as a unit and element of modern society. 
But its power and spirit ever survive in all societies, although 
the forms of its manifestation change. This idea seems not to 
have occurred to any previous writer that we remember. 

We are shown the IRREPRESSIBLE activity of the tribe PRIN 
CIPLE, by its continual reappearance in modern society, even 
where we should be apt to expect it least, as in the early tend 
ency of every religious denomination to change insensibly from 
a voluntary to a virtually hereditary association, especially is 
this the case with the small denominations. We see the same 
thing also, in the various dignified occupations and professions, 
even those of politicians and statesmen. The Corporation be 
comes a Social Circle led by the same Families. 
3. Natural History of Tribe. 

This tribe principle has a very complex origin in human 
nature, and fulfills various different functions. 


First, it forms tribes identical with Social Circles. It sup 
plies Individuals to form new Families. Incest is decided to be 
objectionable, not only on physical grounds but also because 
after arriving at puberty, it is well on account of mental peculiari 
ties, for people to have a new start in life ; as it were, a sort of 
being born again into a new world, by bringing together different 
elements from different Families. And in love, it is not more 
certain that we choose our resemblances in some resoects, than it 
is also certain that we choose our contraries in certain other re 
spects. Thus instinct, as usual, anticipates physiology and other 
sciences. Incest therefore needing to be avoided, a circle or 
collection of Families, that is, a tribe, becomes a necessity even 
to the happiness and perfection of the Family itself. 

Then again, the natural desire and tendency for friendship in 
the same sex, of persons of similar ages and sympathies, require 
a collection of Families. Otherwise, the parents would have no 
friends of their own sex, as here mentioned. And in the younger 
ones, friendship craves more variety than the relation between the 
sexes, and hence there is a stronger reason for the tribe existence, 
for these early ties, than even for the Family relation itself. 
Then we have occasional or only temporary cooperations needed, 
in greater works than can be accomplished by any one Family. 
These give rise to tribes. There is first, temporary organization, 
next social organization, next business corporation, next political 
corporation, and next tribe. 

In primitive times the tribes are often migratory, and so the 
Precinct idea or even the neighborhood idea, is only temporary 
at first. 

Even if we assume, Mankind arose from one pair, the increase 
of Families would soon give rise to social sets and cliques ; and 
these again would soon result in the formation of separate com 
panies and of separate locations, thus, of tribes. There would 
be no centralizing power, no central force of attraction after the 
first parents had died, or at any rate, not long after the successors 
appointed immediately by them had died. And thus the result 
would soon be Social Circle, Corporation and Precinct, together 
forming an independent tribe. Therefore it is, that we must 
commence the theory of society as now understood, and as related 
to politics or to government, with the tribes as already existing. 


For the central power which could exist any length of time, only 
under a patriarchal form, has no relation to anything that goes 
to exercise power in modern society. It is a power (in Family 
isolation), of personal and parental affection, which can never 
afterwards be repeated except under similar circumstances. 
Hence it is that the theory of society as a political government, 
must begin with the centrifugal force of rival tribes, as well as 
their cooperative force. Indeed, it seems almost certain in our 
historical vision, that the centripetal force arose only by an after 
thought, namely, the combination of two or more tribes to resist 
some other one tribe or combination of them. 

The Social Circle and the Corporation are different means of 
overcoming new evils; they are new organs put forth by the life 
of society in its growth, but mark ! not to fulfill functions better 
than the now grown tribe, but to fulfill functions which the now 
grown tribe cannot fulfill at all. The grown tribe may, it is 
true, do the material work to be done, in an inferior manner ; 
but is utterly incapable of accomplishing the mental harmony, 
the moral work. Without the corporative organ, the tribe may 
build a road, but it will only be either one of universal necessity, 
or else one of favoritism to a few, at the expense of the others. 
Again, without the Social Circle functions, the tribe may pro 
duce marriages, but they will not be happy ones. They will 
either be marital servitude, as in primitive conditions ; or mari 
tal wars, as in modern civilization, where fashion now does the 
forcing which the barons and fathers used formerly to do. 
4. Mutual relations of the three constituents. 

(a) Balance of the three constituents. We maintain, that one 
of the necessary balances of power, must be a balance between 
these three elements, as if units, as indeed between all the six 
units of society, namely, Individual, Family, Social Circle, Pre 
cinct, and Nation, and morally, Mankind also ; each taken as 
one alone. In a harmonious government, each of these six 
units must have its full influence, namely, each unit must have 
an equal influence ; and each unit one undivided influence. And 
similarly, the three elements of tribe, as if units, must be brought 
into and kept in a balance with each other, -just as the three 
prismatic colors, all must be weaker or all stronger, in order to 
combine in a pure white light. 


Here then arises the necessity of having each element brought 
into harmony with itself, with all parts of the same element. 

(6) Corporation. Formally, our theory does not argue for 
so much fundamental necessity, prominence or importance, to 
the Corporation, as it does to the Precinct, Social Circle, and 
those other instinctive elements we call units ; but assigns it to 
a separate order, called artificial or rational. All we have to 
remember here is, that the right of all citizens to form simple 
corporations within the Precinct, is a right involved in the fun 
damental elements of society, namely, the tribe element. It is 
therefore as eternal and indefeasible, as the right to form part 
nerships or any other contracts ought to be : but of course not 
including any natural right of monopoly," for this perversion 
into monopoly, is the very matter that has destroyed the rights 
of all men to form corporations at their own will and judgment. 

The greatest peculiarities about corporations, appear to be 
those which follow essentially from the nature of the case, and 
relate mostly to those corporations whose very objects and nature 
require them to have a greater local extent than one Precinct, 
such as corporations for roads, or travel, or general purposes, or 
politics, or for larger divisions of territory than the Precinct. But 
still these should always if possible, be chartered by one or more 
Precincts, rather than by the Nation. It is chiefly thus that 
corporation-honesty and moral responsibility can be revived. 
And the Precincts may combine for special purposes ; either to 
do certain works themselves, or to unite and charter some corpo 
ration to do the same directly, but not through the medium of 
some other corporation. The chartering of one corporation by 
another is unnatural, especially for political purposes. 

(c) Social Circle. The differences of Social Circles, are more 
natural and inherent metaphysically, than of location or Pre 
cinct itself; but those of Corporation are less so ; and when cor 
porations are absorbed by, or become made up of Precincts, still 
the differences of Social Circle will continue. 

But the only Social Circles which can found their true defence 
in the tribe principle, roust be those in which the elements of 
kindred, friendship, affinity, and immediate occupation, are 
likely to be active and prominent. Hence, merely voluntary 
even if organic associations, called "classes' 7 of society, cannot 


be considered to be a fundamental element of government. They 
are ghastly bodies without souls, and the cause of great civil woes. 
In other words, differences of social position pertain to the Pre 
cinct, but not^to the Nation : and their physical forms should be 
either Corporation or Precinct. And the Precinct being the ma 
terial or bodily form, is the one with which daily government has 
more to do. Yet the government which is founded on ignoring 
any fundamental element, is that far, .a falsity. But Social Cir 
cles, enlarged and de-souled into "classes of society," should have 
no recognition as fundamental elements of the unit we call Nation. 

Now in the case of the true Social Circles, as their character 
and object will be spiritual, so also should be the power used, 
namely, spiritual moral and voluntary. And in their case there 
seems no easy task to find any existing satisfactory American 
method, of giving honest and peaceful Social Circles any open 
influence in government; or of preserving in any honest manner 
their rights, except perhaps in the organization of juries, and in 
two or three other applications which are to be considered in 
another place. But the greatest present means for the virtuous 
Social Circles to preserve their fair and equal rights against the 
vicious Social Circles, and against inimical prejudices, is, by so 
ciety spontaneously forming into small Precinc:s with original 
state rights, as shown in that part of the subject. In fact, all 
minorities must look to the full right and freedom of forming 
themselves or collecting into state-Precincts, as their principal 
method of obtaining either property-rights or personal freedom, 
in the United States. The common corporations ought not to 
have, and Social and religious Circles cannot easily have politi 
cal rights, as such, in this country, except as in Precincts. Hence, 
the tribe principle practically becomes the Precinct element. 
Nevertheless, new kinds of corporations can be devised, to ac 
complish all that is necessary under this head. 

In this/ country, property-holders, like all other minorities, 
can look for their rights to the spontaneous formation of civil 
corporations, or else of collecting in small Precincts where 
owners' rights will be guarded simply on the ground of the 
fundamental rights and independence of the tribe- elements, and 
of the tribe principle. Property is only one of the constituents 
of Social Circle. The other constituents equally as important 


and active, are, morality, intellect, education, and sometimes even 
personal acquaintanceship and good manners. 

(d) Precinct. Just as in the Individual, improvement re 
quires that each person should become more in harmony with 
himself; his affections, his reason, and his will, all harmonizing 
together: and just as in the Family, its two objective principles 
must be in harmony and in unison with each other, that is, the 
parentage principle in unison with the sexual, in one unit the 
Family; just so, the three different elements or principles of the 
tribe, namely, Precinct Social Circle and Corporation, should in 
a perfected social system, be found all in the same one unit ; that 
is, the usual Precinct should be ever tending, more and more, 
to become or consist of only one Social Circle, and to be but one 
corporation for its own special purposes. 

But all Precincts need not be thus constituted. For the most 
beautiful music is made not by all the sounds being the same, 
but by some of the notes being far distant in the scale, yet duly 
related to each other, and so, harmonious. And the prettiest of 
all the accords, and the only one that nature makes, is the octave, 
(the natural harmony of the male and female voices). Thus 
one kind of Precincts would consist of sames or equals as to in 
tellect, morals and property : the other kind would be of accords, 
where the differences of intellect morals and property would be 
organically recognized. But the tendency of even these two 
kinds of Precincts would ever be towards each other morally 
and metaphysically ; namely, towards each other in resemblance, 
and towards each other in friendship. 

It would therefore appear, that most of those powers of Indi 
vidual freedom, which the Individual-liberty theorists advocate 
for private persons, we advocate for the three differentiations of 
the tribe principle, namely, Precinct, Social Circle and Corpora 
tion. And we prevent these from abuses and tyranny, by two 
principles. One is, the equal rights of all other similar bodies, 
as established and guarded by the central or general government ; 
Spencer's principle for the Individual, extended to these three 
social bodies. The other principle is, by making the Precincts so 
small comparatively, and by so securing the freedom and security 
of persons and property, in changing from one Precinct to an 
other, that the free choices become indefinitely various. 


Precincts being material things, visible material divisions of 
the earth, must ever be the forms and bodies, of which social 
differences and voluntary associations are the souls. Precincts 
are the fundamental organizations for human liberties, and for 
the rights of minorities. Then, by the voluntary principles of 
competition, interest, urgency and utility, whereby Individuals 
and parents are now able to regulate themselves and their affairs, 
the Precincts would then be obliged and be taught, to regulate 
themselves and their affairs for the general good. And this, too, 
without their necessarily having any more really benevolent in 
tentions, or much more Social Science than they now have ; but 
all be brought about by those spontaneous natural principles of 
social order, which the liberty and " let alone" theorists advocate 
for Individuals. Thus Precincts, like Individuals, would all be 
acting however ignorantly yet surely, for the good of all the 



1 . Balances of the Analytical Seven. 

(a) Law of proportions of power. The balance of elements, 
implying an equality of political power in each, requires that 
the activity and perceptibility of the power of each should be in 
inverse proportion to its extent or greatness. In other words, 
the larger and the more complex and less voluntary, any po 
litical organization is, the less compulsory power should it exer 
cise over the elements below it ; in other w r ords, the greater the 
tribe or Precinct or company, the less power should it exercise, 
over either the Families or the Individuals who compose it. 
And the greater the Nation, the less power should it attempt 
over either the Precincts, companies, Families or Individuals, 
w T ho compose it. 

(6) Natural tendency to over-centralization. Nearly all the 
political evils of government come from violating the foregoing 
law, come from applying to tribes and Precincts, principles 
applicable only to Families, and then applying to Nations, prin 
ciples that are only applicable to tribes or Precincts. This we 
shall find to be the cause and process, not only in theory, but 
in the actual history of the origin of society and governments. 


Even the Chinese empire, now consisting of one-third the popu 
lation of the earth, was once a small tribe ; and then its patri 
archal form was quite appropriate. The only mistake it has 
made is, just like that of our individual states, namely, merely 
retaining the old form under the now entirely different circum 
stances. And this too, with the same excuse as we, namely, 
that the change of extent is too gradual to be exactly marked as 
to any precise time. 

Just as Individuals generally have a tendency to excess of all 
social indulgences, and to giving the social customs of society 
unrighteous sway ; so have governments and Nations the tend 
ency to excess of the social principle in centralization. Just as 
the stronger sex has sway, to the neglect of the feelings of the 
weaker, so in political constitutions, the stronger unit, that is, 
the Nation, is prone more and more to have its own way, even 
with the free consent of the lesser ones. The thorough reform 
must come, not from the Precinct, but from the Nation. The 
tendency is towards too much compulsory society throughout. 
In Families, it comes to neglect the rights of Individuals, and 
makes social slaves. In the Precinct or neighborhood, it comes 
under the guise of fashion, to nullify the rights of Families and 
Individuals. In the Nation, it comes absorbing all the rights 
of the Precinct, and finally reverses the true order of nature, 
and assumes with true feudal despotism, that the rights of the 
Precinct flow downwards from the Nation. In like manner no 
doubt, if a universal or general empire of many Nations could 
be established, it would also have the temerity to assume, that 
all rights had originated from it ; although Mankind had been 
without it in fact for thousands of years, and it itself were but 
of yesterday, the mere success of tyranny or of brute force. 

"With the Chinese and about three-fourths of the population 
of the globe, the two elements which the governments chiefly 
recognize are, first, the Family element, through its head the 
father; second, the Mankind-element, in the limited form of a 
universal empire of its own race entirely secluded from all other 

In the other and smaller part of the human race, the Family 
as a governmental element is scarcely recognized at all, and the 
national and race ideas, are not isolation from all other Nations, 


but are conquest over them ; and among the Nations themselves, 
the idea is not confederation, at least not permanent confedera 
tion, but each one struggles to maintain such a balance of power, 
as will give itself a moderate advantage over each of the other 
powers in the equilibrium! Yet all the while, the idea of a 
Precinct as an element of governmental power, has never had 
its balanced exhibit among; civilized or semi-civilized Nations, 

o / 

except perhaps in some parts of the German empire, in India 
and Japan. But among savages and barbarians, the idea of the 
Precinct-power, has been held with such tenacity as absolutely to 
prevent nationality. 

(c) Fields of physical and metaphysical power. In the spon 
taneous and inorganic relations of Nations to Mankind, and in 
corporations, the more developed and intellectual parts obtain 
mastery over the others. Whereas, in the compulsory, very 
formal, organic and ordinary relations of Precincts to Nations, 
the most physical and least cultivated morally, whether persons 
or Precincts, are the classes which are strong, and do practically 
succeed in governing the whole Nation. Thus the South gov 
erned the North, and now the West governs the East. 

The submission of Individuals and of Precincts to Nations, 
is different from that of Nation to Nation, or of Nation to 
Mankind. The principles are different. 

Hence, each locality, and every minority, should have its 
rights protected by some practical and social means, at least as 
effectual in their sphere, as the barriers of race, which include 
language, religion and permanent intellectual and physical de 
velopment. And it is evident that there is no possible arrange 
ment short of human perfection, that can accomplish this end, 
except that radical constitution of Precinct, which our theory 
proposes; or that of voluntary political Corporation, subsequently 
to be more fully explained. 

(d] Different elements represent different rights. There are three 
moral theories of social rights, essentially different, namely, the 
cosmopolitan, the national, and the neighborly. These three 
moral theories are all true in their proper locations, but outrage 
ously false, out of their locations. 

The cosmopolitan or universal-brotherhood theory, is that 
which properly applies to the internal affairs of the Precinct, 


and of the Corporation, except to such affairs as are inconsistent 
with the peculiar organization or object thereof. But the national 
theory applies to affairs outward of the Nation, and establishes 
chiefly, the self-protecting rights. The Nation's chief operations 
are with other Nations, it being the protector of Precincts and 
Corporations, and being the organ expressly for foreign affairs. 
The chief uses of central or national government, are to guard 
against the forces, tricks, tariffs, &c., of other national govern 
ments ; and to prevent the internal Individuals, Families, and 
tribes, from resorting to force, tricks, tariffs, &c., in hinderance 
of internal freedom and intercourse. The Nation, as to other 
Nations, is to be an active power in principle ; whilst in regard 
to the internal parts of which it is composed, it is to be nega 
tively active, namely, active chiefly to anticipate and prevent 
probable disorders ; Nations being supposed to be at selfish com 
petition with other Nations, and to favor peaceful cooperation 
within their own borders. 

To consider, then, the most active and efficient functions of 
right daily government, we must go to the Precincts or small 
bodies, and consider THEIE rights and powers. 

As to the Nation's influence WITHIN the Precincts, or within 
the corporations, THAT must be founded upon cosmopolitan or 
universal brotherhood principles, with the additional idea of a 
paternal governing and unifying principle. Whereas, the Pre 
cincts themselves, and the corporations also, each one for itself, 
will be the administrator of the aforesaid world-wide principles 
of brotherhood, to all such persons as properly and of right 
compose it, or ought to continue to compose it. To all others, 
it must be a self-protecting institution, that is, be conducted on 
the national theory. The same is true, also, of Social Circles, 
Families, and Individuals, every one for itself, the Nation for 
them all. 

The difference between national and Precinct rights, may be 
summed up thus ; national government is fulfilled by securing 
the two rights, internal liberty and removal. Precinct govern 
ment is fulfilled by securing internal strictness, and by free 
removal. And voluntary Corporation can fulfill many of the 
functions of both Precinct and Nation, but not all the functions 
of either. 


2. Balances of the whole Fourteen. 

(a) In General. The foregoing doctrines of the balance of 
the units are now to be explained in a wider sense. Hitherto 
we have referred them only to the elements of the analytics, but 
now they are to be widened so as to include the elements of the 
synthetics also : and these balances are to be understood chiefly 
in a moral and metaphysical sense. 

Society, as we have already seen, analytically consists of six 
instinctive units and one deliberate element, together making 
seven fundamental elements ; also we have seen that synthet 
ically considered there are seven departments of thought and 
administration in government (whatever be the analytical ele 
ments which administer it or are subject to it), namely, Prop 
erty, Life, Health, Intellectuals, Morals, Civil Government, and 
Communism. And a complete Social Science must include the 
treatment of all the fourteen elements as fundamental : and 
therefore, a balance must be maintained between them.' But 
the term balance must now be understood in a more abstract 
sense. The first seven elements are typical of the last seven. 
Thus, all we have said of the theory and balance of the first 
seven, is, by a little enlargement of principle, applicable to the 
theory and balance of the whole fourteen also. But the balance 
now, is rather a balance of opinions and of scientific departments, 
than of political powers. 

Here belongs the explanation of a law of facts that has often 
been observed, namely, that the attempts to suppress some moral 
evils by force, or by direct legal action, turn out in fact to 
really increase the evils, besides producing other and greater 
ones. Attempts of this kind generally come from efforts by 
some more general Ele:nent, to take away the rights of some 
less general one. Th.^ explanation then is, that the rights of 
each element will find vent in its own sphere, so that no one 
element CAN profitably interfere with the rights of another 
element. No other explanation of the curious law of facts 
above mentioned, has been given that we know of, which does 
not tend in substance, either to take away the value of law 
altogether, or else offer itself as a mere isolated and empirical 
explanation of some single fact. But what is wanted is an 
explanation which will be both general rnd definite. 


(c) Balancing powers, to be homogeneous. Moral powers must 
balance moral ones, and political powers, balance political. For, 
in regard to the balance of the elements, it is not always neces 
sary that the equilibrium be maintained by political or civil 
power, neither is it possible always to maintain such equilibrium 
by moral or intellectual means only, without civil or political 
power, but sometimes the one kind of power must be relied 
upon, and sometimes the other. All that this part of the theory 
requires is, that the equilibrium should SOMEHOW be actually 

It will however be evident on reflection, that to establish a 
theory which will be simple and homogeneous, the political 
power of one element must always be balanced by the political 
power of the other elements ; and so also with the moral powers. 
Thus for instance, the moral or intellectual powers of a district 
should be balanced by the same kind of powers in the Individ 
ual, the Family or the Nation. And on the other hand, just 
in proportion to whatever political power may be granted to a 
Nation, so also should balancing political power be bestowed 
upon the Individual, the Family, and the district. For while 
it is true that one kind of power in one element, may possibly 
be greatly counterbalanced by another kind of power in the 
other elements, yet the problem or case for human calculation 
is thereby made indefinitely or infinitely complex: so that on 
the one hand, human reason can never fully understand the 
equilibrium, even if an equilibrium could be obtained ; and on 
the other hand, the chances are almost infinite against there 
ever being an equilibrium under such conditions. 

It would follow from this theory ; as Mankind or the race as 
a whole, is a real unit ; that government can never be perfect 
until some limited balance of political power is vested in Man 
kind, and some suitable political form discovered whereby that 
power may be exercised. And as long and as far as the power 
of mankind as a whole, is exercised only by moral and intel 
lectual means, so far and so long it may be kept in due equilib 
rium, without any other powers in the other elements than the 
moral intellectual powers ; and vice-versa. 

Some principles of social duty are dependent entirely upon 
conditions of mutuality, for instance, the Free Trade principles. 


So also are all theories of equality. They must be recognized 
by both parties, or they are not justly obligatory upon either. 
Yet, there are Christian duties of supererogation, to a limited de 
gree, in Social Science. But on ordinary principles, no Nation, 
Precinct, locality or corporation, can be expected to act unself 
ishly to others, nor to cease to strive to maintain or obtain mas 
tery, when it knows that the others are striving to maintain or 
obtain the mastery over it. 

Although the balance of power and of rights between all the 
fourteen elements, is to be equally maintained, yet property is 
not to be counted directly, except in communism, where the 
very nature of communism counteracts the evils of an honest 
property influence or representation within a commune. In other 
words, a regulated and limited common property can (and alone 
can) firmly establish a property-representation for those who 
have contributed it. This doctrine of course precludes, until a 
more perfect human nature comes, that absolute communism 
which the so-called socialists imagine. And on the other hand, 
it excludes all vain and hopeless attempts to obtain for property, 
some political power indirectly in ordinary civil government. 

(c) Delegation of Powers. Each element must be considered 
as delegating a portion of its powers to the political govern 
ments of the Precinct, Nation or Corporation, so far as neces 
sary for the preservation of the rest of the rights and interests 
of the same element; but not, as is generally thought, be required 
to make this sacrifice for the rights and interests of some other 
unit or element. For that would be a sort of metaphysical 
generosity, not to be expected in government affairs. 

Good government cannot be obtained without delegating 
strong powers to some party or organ, whether Unit, Element 
or Individual. But the difficulty is how to apportion the dif 
ferent powers to their proper Elements. 

The right of government to operate in various miscellaneous 
affairs, not directly necessary to preserve equal rights and prop 
erty (such as education, maintenance of the poor, post offices, 
&c.j &c.,) has been questioned. But we maintain that the im 
portant tests are, not the kinds of w r ork, but the amount and 
object of the interference, and especially the unit by which the 
interference is to be accomplished. 


We must grant the right of each unit to take direct care of 
the parts next under it, and of which it is composed. But 
excessive centralization cannot be justified by authority of this 
principle, because excessive centralization attributes to a Nation 
the right to violate the equal rights, all at once, of all the other 

Another point to touch upon here, relates to all the depart 
ments of government. This point is the right of government 
to an adequate share of property-accumulations, bearing some 
proportion to its share of influence in the production thereof. 
Nearly all property is owing largely to civilization, and that 
again is largely owing to the peace and order produced by good 
government. This claim comes, not for officers nor Individuals, 
but for the thing itself, government. Good government can 
not be obtained without paying well for it openly and honestly, 
both in money and in honor; to some persons money, and to 
other persons honor, and to others, both. And if the large 
payments were made honestly and openly, the real expense 
would be less in the end than where the remunerations are 
taken underhandedly ; and then better men also would be 

(d) Typicalness of the Series. In the series (as given in the 
Analytics) of the seven elements, each of the six units as a 
whole is typical of all the units above it in generality ; and the 
developments of each unit are therefore to be considered as 
typical of higher social phenomena, as a flight of six stairs, 
rising higher and higher. But Corporation placed solitary as 
the seventh element, has all the six units typical of and leading 
to it, not as stairs, each to and by means of the other, but each 
for itself leading directly to it, like doors and windows on the 
first floor of a building. Consequently, the reader is requested 
to give that turn to whatever articles we may publish of that 
analytical series, so far as their nature admits ; and thus to read 
them with both meanings. For it is by such methods of study, 
applied to each unit, that the writer entertains hopes of some of 
the many future unexpected, but indisputable, developments in 
Social Science. And it appears to him that the very same rela 
tions, but in a more transcendental sense, may be traced in the 
seven elements of the Synthetics also. 



1. Indirect Balances in General. 

There are some very simple indirect methods of approxi 
mating the genera] balance of all the fourteen elements. The 
first is, investing the male sex alone with civil powers. Bat of 
that, we would treat under Family. The second consists in in 
vesting age with a counterbalancing power in government. This 
may be accomplished by placing the powers of age and youth in 
separate legislative bodies, so as to counterbalance each other; 
malting greater age a qualification for voting for senators, than 
for voting for members of the lower house. The mere age of 
the official representative, (as now ordained) is of very little con 
sequence in this connection. This topic will be treated under 
" Civil Government." Another method of indirect balance, is 
by arbitration-juries, the full and practical details of which are 
reserved fpr " Civil Government." But here we give a general 
statement of the idea. 

2. Arbitration. 

Here, a few words may be allowed upon the propriety of ar 
bitration in civil affairs. Often, both parties in a suit are to 
blame : in which case, judges and juries ought to prescribe com 
promises where practicable. But our laws do not fulfill any 
such function, except the parties themselves voluntarily agree 
to it : which is not at all what we mean. For the law, in many 
cases ought to fix compromises, rather than decide entirely on 
one side. 

The next argument in favor of compromises, is, that all law 
and all order and all society are founded upon compromises. 
An instance is found in the new law to settle the difficulties of 
the land-tenancy in Ireland. It is to be administered by courts 
of arbitration specially instituted for the purpose. Because it is 
evident, that common law remedies for a grievance so deep, 
among a people so poor as the Irish are, would be useless to 
them. And if arbitration be good for them, why will it not be 
equally good for us and for all ? Thus it is, that the necessity 
of arbitration in civil affairs, is beginning to be perceived. And 
even in criminal affairs, the Scotch have a compromise verdict, 
namely, " not proved." 


3. Juries in general. 

Juries, originally in former times, were only of the middle 
class. They were an institution established to protect the 
middle class from the tyranny of the landed aristocracy. The 
middle class is of course the most suitable if only one class is to 
be represented therein. But anyone class will take too much 
care of itself. The right to vote, and the right to serve on 
juries, were co-existent at the first; and then, when the right to 
vote was given to all in the United States, the right of juries 
went with it, although not deliberately as a specific or intended 
object, but incidentally, and even perhaps inadvertently, jury 
work being considered as a duty rather than as a right. 

The idea of trying a man " by his peers," originated in crimi 
nal trials, when political offences were held to be the same as 
criminal ones, and when the defendant was considered as the 
only person interested (the commonwealth being considered as 
the plaintiff), but that idea does not apply to property cases, for 
in these, there are involved the interests, at least of two other 
Individuals. But even in personal and criminal cases, the feel 
ings of the injured and the sympathy of his friends, have a right 
to be and ought to be heard, at least as fully as those of the 
accused. Only thus can private revenge be prevented. More 
over, to give one class, trials by their own sympathizers only, 
tends to put other classes at their mercy as to life and limb, 
and destroys the general feeling of security. Now in principle, 
the idea of trying a man by a jury of his own class alone, is just 
as absurd, as it would be to try men by a jury composed only 
of the sympathizers with the injured party or with the accusers. 
Hence, both in criminal trials and civil suits, the jury ought to 
consist of men from both sides or classes. 

4. Classes of Society. 

Juries, if they are, ever to be impartial and under equal influ 
ences, must recognize existing classes, and provide against in 
equality in the jury box. As long as petty jealousies do exist 
between elements of society, and the sympathizers of each decide 
for its own class ; and as long as oaths have so little effect in 
doubtful matters of opinion ; and as the decisions of juries often 
of necessity have to depend upon* doubtful, obscure and difficult 
points of facts and of law, so long every government should, 


in some measure take cognizance of and provide for the differ 
ences which do exist ; and the government which so fails to 
recognize the real differences, is so far founded upon a falsity, 
and so far is in itself a despotism. And if government persists 
in such oversight, and persists in practically maintaining that 
minorities have no rights that majorities are bound to respect; 
such selfishness and unfairness in the government, will surely 
also select unfair men for its officers, and men not above taking 
bribes ; and the consequence will be, that the minorities will 
persist and increase in their practices, of considering that majori 
ties have no rights that minorities are bound to respect if they 
can avoid them by bribery and trickery. The present anarchical 
and selfish condition of the moral sentiments on these subjects, 
is very acceptable to those who are willing to give or to receive 
bribes, but is rapidly corrupting the moral tone of the Nation, 
and throwing the wealth of the country into the hands of im 
moral tricksters or reckless gamblers ; and unless checked, must 
ultimately result in driving honest poverty out of politics, and 
honest wealth out of the country. Let all classes have their 
dues, but let them use the means of honesty, compromise and 
arbitration. Then politics will become synonymous with pat 
riotism ; and wealth become synonymous with virtue and 

Taking juries indiscriminately from the people, gives the 
refined, the educated, and the wealthy circles, but a small 
minority, seldom even one in each jury, and in cities, not one 
for several juries. Now, in trials where large amounts of prop 
erty are in dispute between contestants all wealthy, this habit 
of submitting them to the decision of men most of whom have 
little or no property, and whose personal character is unknown, 
is a habit quite as erroneous in principle as it is unjust and cor 
rupting in practice. Moreover, juries in reality are a sort of 
arbitrators, and ought to be so considered and arranged for, in 
order that both plaintiff and defendant, and all parties interested, 
should have an equal representation therein. And it is well 
known that in the large cities, the juries very often are packed, 
and made to consist of men of little character, and who are 
either watching out for jobs, or glad to glut their clan-animosi 
ties and partialities. - 


5. Principles of the Methods. 

The methods for constituting juries which we would propose 
as the true ones, are founded upon the three following principles. 
(1) A wise recognition of, and so an efficient provision against, 
the evils of the different classes of society. This recognition 
might ascertain the classes of society, either on the basis of vol 
untary association, or of Social Circles, or on the basis of their 
taxation, or on the basis of expenditures. (2) The second prin 
ciple upon which our proposed method is founded, is a modified 
arbitration, namely, simple arbitration modified by this, that the 
parties are to choose, not the individual arbitrators, but the class 
thereof; or at any rate, the law to choose such a class for them 
as they would naturally choose for themselves. That is to say, 
the law chooses a portion of the arbitrators from their natural 
class. (3) The third principle upon which juries should be 
founded is, the principle of counting the public a third party, 
needing its share of arbitrators in trials for crimes or public 
wrongs, also in civil cases of direct public interest ; so that the 
public would have one-third of the arbitrators, and the plaintiff 
another third, and the defendant another third. 


1. Expression of Averages. 

As the universal balance of all the elements of Social Science, 
is supposed to be the highest attainment of human government, 
so, in a republican government, or in a deliberative body, this 
balance of elements may be popularly supposed to be attained 
by and in the AVERAGE will of the ONE element, namely, the 
Individual. At any rate, a government can only be truly re 
publican, even as representing only the one element Individual, 
when it represents the opinion and the will of the AVERAGE OF 
ALL; not of a majority only. The true will of any voting 
assembly is not its majority- will, but its average will. 

The discovery and expression of averages by elections, is a 
problem requiring considerable mathematical ability to under 
stand, when stated briefly: therefore a fuller treatment of it is 
reserved for "Civil Government." But the process of voting 
under it would be quite simple enough. It is a process which 
is also commendable for its other advantages, besides the mere 



feature of its expressing averages, and is merely one case under 
the general formula of the ideal ballot now to be mentioned. 

2. The Ideal Ballot. 

(1) Ideal Ballot in general. As a brief abstract statement 
would scarcely be intelligible, the accompanying concrete for 
mula is furnished. This general formula ticket is given in a 
very low number of names, merely to exhibit the principle. 
The names of persons may be either written or printed. The 
grade figures below 100 must be written by each voter. The 
rest of the ticket is supposed always to be printed. It exhibits 
ORDERS of choice and also DEGREES in those orders. In the 
proposed article "Civil Government" we shall show how to 
simplify these ballots and the degrees of choice for practical 
purposes ; but here we treat them only generally and for mathe 
maticians, to show the theory. 





First Choice 100 


Second Choice P5 

- Clark 

Third Choice 92 


Fourth Choice 70 


Fifth Choice 66 

- Flipp 

Sixth Choice 62 

This formula would probably be the actual ticket, only in 
four cases ; namely, either for six choices by each voter, if only 
one officer were being voted for, or three choices, if a board of 
two officers were being voted for, or two choices, if a board of 
three officers. (Or six votes for four officers.) 

For small boards however, three choices for each officer should 
be allowed to each voter. And even for large boards there 
should never be less than two choices for each officer. So that 
in cases of large boards, the ticket should be enlarged to double 
the number of the board to be elected. For instance, a board 
of ten officers would require a ticket with privileges of at least 
twenty names, by each voter. 

This ideal ballot gives at once and altogether, all the advan- 


tages of all possible improved plans of voting, whether by con 
stituencies, or by representative bodies. All the other proposed 
improvements are valuable, only in proportion as they practi 
cally approximate the same results as this, or else, as they may 
tend to prepare for and lead to its adoption. This most general 
formula for a ballot, namely, our ideal ballot, is one which 
expresses all the following principles at once : 

((a)) Applicability to any number of persons, for one office or 
board of officers, whether one or many. ((6)) Expressive of 
alternate choices, and of the degrees thereof, both as to candi 
dates and as to PARTIES. ((c)) There are here supposed to be 
only such legal restrictions to its absolute unlimitedness, in re 
spect both to choices and to the degrees thereof, as are necessary 
for practical convenience of counting ; and therefore applicable 
to exclude any immense count of useless scattered ballots. No 
other restrictions are now made than are thus or otherwise sc ! en- 
tifically expressed. ((dj) Restriction c to a. Let each voter 
vote for not more, say, than five alternate choices when for one 
officer, four alternates, for two, three alternates, for three or 
more officers to be elected in a board. ((e)) But no voter need 
vote all the number allowed him, unless he chooses to, but 
should never vote less than three alternates, nor ever more than 
ten alternates, except when a board of more than five, and then 
two alternates for each officer. ((/)) All the expressions must be 
placed on one ballot paper, whether for a board of officers, or 
for only one officer. ((g)) Restrictions c and d to b. Let the 
highest grades of alternates be, say 100, and let the lowest grades 
of alternates be never less, say, than 50. And let the voter at 
will, divide all the grades of his alternates between 100 and 50. 

((/i)) Illustration. Case d-e-f. Suppose for one officer. Each 
ballot would contain five names. Then a voter's first choice 
would be 100, his second perhaps might be 90, his third might 
be 80, his fourth, 75, and his fifth 70, or with differences 
whether fixed by law or not, any how, so the fifth choice was 
not less than 50. (()) Illustration. Case d-e-f. Suppose for a 
board of five officers. Then each voter has the privilege of his 
highest number, namely, 10 names on his ballot. ((j)) But if 
voters would write no more than five or six names, this omission 
would have the same effect as (but no other effect on the names 


omitted than) if the voter had remained away from the polls, as 
to those names. 

((&)) If three parties were up, and if each voter would vote 
for two persons of eaph party, then the sample ticket Avould 
represent a case of a voter grading ALTERNATIVE PARTIES, as 
well as grading alternative candidates. 

((I)) Now, the summing up of these grade numbers of all the 
candidates would represent numerically, the comparative total 
grade values of all the candidates. ((m)) In the case of election 
of one officer, the one highest total in I would be the one suc 
cessful candidate. ((n)) In case of several officers being voted 
for, as one board, say five, then the highest five totals in I would 
be the five successful candidates. 

(2) Ideal Ballot for ideas. The same principles which have 
been given above, for voting for individuals, are also applicable 
to voting for Jaws, clauses of laws, motions, amendments, &c., 
&c. But the methods of and the restrictions in their applica 
tion thus to ideas, are among the highest and latest attainments 
of forms in Social Science. They will be treated of in a sub 
sequent work, under the head of " Civil Government." 


Another transcendental use of averages is, their ability to 
express the true principle of currency; and their consequent 
applicability as an actual basis for the only currency that ever 
can approximate to honesty and flexibility both ways, or to per 
manent security. We can only here hint at this basis ; and post 
pone the methods of its application, and the arguments for its 
propriety, to a subsequent work. Well then, this proposed cur 
rency, first must not falsify, must promise to give nothing but 
what it can and will give when demanded ; and second must 
promise to give a portion of all the commodities usually bought 
or sold in trade. Because every sale of any article possessed by 
us, is essentially an exchange of some one article for the privi 
lege of reinvesting the same in ANY OTHER article ; and this 
requires that the said privilege should be represented by an 
abstract currency, but yet one that can always and at once be 
m;ule concrete at the option of the holder. The element of 
AVERAGES in this currency is transcendental, yet theoretically 


absolute, and consists in this, that the trade transactions in each 
one commodity during a long average time, are considered as one 
element of those constituting the idea of the currency. And the 
commodities and their proportions are selected with a view to 
represent fairly, the collective average of the different commodi 
ties by averages taken separately for the same fair length of 
time. And such a collective average must (just as in the case 
of votes) be the true total average of the commodities bought 
and sold. And then a convenient amount of that average .of 
commodities could be 'taken as the unit (instead of pollar or 
Pound), and then convenient fractions of that must be taken 
for smaller amounts. But of course in practice, only a certain 
select number of commodities could be taken, but fairly, so as to 
represent the whole these representative commodities could be 
taken in the practical application for a real and actual currency. 

Every currency that redeems promises to pay one thing by 
paying another thing, or by promises to pay another, and so on, 
can be nothing but a vicious gas for ballooning out into the 
unfathomable regions of financial space, unless somewhere at the 
bottom or end of the promise upon promise, there be a some 
thing real and unalterable. And furthermore, every step of 
promise upon promise, complicates the matter almost indefi 
nitely, both as to the ability of the human mind to comprehend 
its chances, and also complicates almost indefinitely the opportu 
nities of the currency law-makers to "see-saw" it to suit them 
selves, and with injury and injustice to a whole community. 

Another point is that the amount of silver and gold is not a 
tenth nor perhaps a hundredth part sufficient to meet the de 
mands made for it in crises and panics ; and the sticklers for a 
purely gold and silver currency can never do any better with 
this part of the argument than to say that such a currency is 
the best that can be established. But, is it the best ? 

Now the seemingly probable expedient to avoid the difficulty, 
is to introduce the function of time and credit, and to give all 
currency-promises a right to require some specific time of notice 
before payment can be demanded. But suppose, when the time 
of payment comes, the old panic still continues or a new one 
arises, what becomes of this probable expedient ? Another ex 
tension (called suspension) ? And another? And so on? Thus 


we see our balloon gas has only changed its form. Previously 
it consisted in piling promise upon promises, now it consists in 
piling time upon time. 

But a currency of commodities, taking a sufficient number of 
plentiful commodities, would always allow of redemption at the 
option of the holder. One objection is that commodities are in 
convenient to carry, and may not be the ones we happen to want. 
This objection is easily removed in the present state of civiliza 
tion and credit, by warehouses, and by pledges of actual stocks 
of goods. And surely a credit system that can be trusted to 
make irredeemable currencies, or to make extensions and post 
ponements at willy can be better trusted to make a credit cur 
rency based upon commodities demandable at will. As to the 
other objection of fluctuations and scarcity of some kinds of 
goods at certain times; this would be overcome by taking a 
large variety of the commodities most used, and of standard 
mercantile qualities. Suppose some thirty different articles were 
selected, as Wheat, Rye, Corn, Iron, Lead, Copper and so on. 
Then if any one or two of these happened to be unusually scarce 
when panic came, or payment was demanded, let the payor have 
the privilege of objecting and excepting to said one or two ar 
ticles, and then let the payee have also the privilege to except to 
an equal amount in value of any other articles he might select 
as being unusually plenty. Thus the average would be main 
tained. The proportioned values for such purposes would have 
to be fixed when the currency itself was established. And let 
NO ALTERATION of the currency be made except by an altera 
tion of the Constitution of the Precinct or Nation ; and only by 
the constitution let such a currency be established. 

The unit should be taken as near the value of a gold coin 
dollar as may be convenient, and then the constitution should 
settle the exact value of the dollar in comparison with the new 
unit of averages. Then whilst the standard was fixed in the 
constitution, the details might be left to ordinary legislation but 
requiring perhaps a two-third vote for alterations even thereby. 
And after the relation of the dollar to the unit of averages had 
been fixed, then part of the Real Estate and surplus old stocks 
and loans of corporations, held by the banks, or part of their 
fixed capital above what they had loaned out for the component 


articles of the averages, might be allowed by an alteration of the 
constitution, to enter into a new and enlarged list of components 
but unaltered in average value. Then first class Rail Road 
mortgage bonds, as also national state and municipal bonds, thus 
translated into the new units of currency averages, might be 
allowed to form a small or reasonable part of the banking basis. 

Or it would be possible to make all these changes by one 
alteration of the constitution, if it could be done fairly so as not 
to make it a subterfuge to debase or alter the real value of the 
currency-units. This transition itself would not be more dan 
gerous than the present system, nor than the old system of state 

And it would be better to make the whole change at once 
perhaps, so as not to entirely throw out the government bonds 
that are now the basis of banking. Indeed the very same 
amount of government bonds that are now required as security, 
ought and might continue to be required. Our whole proposed 
change refers not at all to the bonds as security, but only to the 
substitution of pledges of commodities instead of the artificial 
present legal tenders and bank notes. And it would not be right 
to release all those bonds at once and have them thrown on the 
market at a ruinous reduction, which would at once spread dis 
tress and ruin throughout the country, and only to the benefit 
of foreign purchasers. 

The reader understands that all bonds would then be estimated 
for any and all purposes, at and only at their value in the new 
units of the currency averages. 

It is also understood that no property or commodity pledged 
as the basis of currency, should be sold or removed unless by 
substitution of some other lots of the same kind and amount, or 
by repayment and withdrawal of that much currency. Such a 
currency, in effect would be simply " orders" for goods in such 
kinds and proportions that everybody would want them, and 
everybody could readily convert them into the particular com 
modity wanted. 

All is made both convenient and practicable, by the introduc 
tion of systems of warehouses, and by giving the new system to 
banks based upon warehouse and other commercial contracts for 
commodities actually in store, whether in public or in Individual's 


own warehouse. And what such banks would promise to pay 
would be certain definite quantities in the prescribed ratios of 
each of the kinds of commodities previously prescribed, when 
demanded in certain specified amounts : having previously issued 
out or loaned these currency averages in agreed amounts, for any 
of the component specified commodities, or rather for pledges by 
the customer, of the certificates of warehouse for the same, as 
might be agreed upon. 

There would also surely arise a class of dealers, some, mer 
chants, and some, brokers, who would deal exclusively or very 
specially, in only those articles which were required in the 
Averages. And some of these would be wholesalers, and some 
retailers. And to these each Individual customer could bring 
in his currency, and obtain only just the one or two articles that 
he wanted, and thus obtain them at only the usual and regular 
market price, and without any loss. But in case of panic before 
the arising of such a class of dealers, of course, holders of small 
amounts of currency would have to sell it to brokers or mer 
chants, who would thereby accumulate the required amounts for 
presentation for payment. But the details must be reserved for 
the proper place in " Property," one of our proposed future works 
on Social Science. 

The only fluctuations or discount, such a currency would be 
capable of, would be the aforesaid brokers' charges for buying 
up small amounts to consolidate ; and the slight expenses of the 
charges and freights to near places deemed more safe ; and the 
difference between the quality of the commodities which the 
banks would really pay, and what the knowing ones would 
expect, and that would not be much, for whatever difference in 
quality they would previously expect, would be the permanent 
depreciation of it, and not the expense of redemption. 


The objection is often made against Social Scientists, that there 
is no practical use in their kind of discussions, and no hope that 
any special attention will ever practically be given to their con 

We answer, that this question of practicability depends entirely 
upon what the particular plans are that may be offered, and in 


what spirit. If good plansiaad sound arguments can be offered, 
in a good spirit, their practicability will depend on the intelli 
gence, patriotism and justice of the people. Under such circum 
stances, to doubt the practicability of the suggestions if good 
ones, is to doubt the intelligence and patriotism of the people. 
And when once any plans began to be tried in one or two 
localities, and were found to produce, in a pre-eminent degree, 
the benefits expected from them ; then to doubt their adoption 
more and more by the people, would manifest a deeper infi 
delity in the fitness of the people for self-government, than 
would be worth while to argue against, in the United States. 
Where would be the fitness of a people for self-government, if 
they were going to be forever insensible to the demonstrations 
of sound arguments confirmed by undoubted experience; and 
if truth and justice must never dare to show their faces until 
after their practicability is shown ? 

Besides ; the World is wide ; and there are other peoples in it 
beside those of the United States. And in these higher prob 
lems of Social Science, there can and will be emulation among 
Nations, as well as, and perhaps sooner than between the Pre 
cincts of the same Nation. 

The suggestions of Social Science are sometimes alleged to be 
impracticable, because not put forth by any great politician or 
political party. But that was equally true once, of every re 
form that has ever been accomplished. Reforms begin in moral 
powers, but after being morally successful, they are adopted by 
political parties, by one party or by several. Those who are 
best to think, are not the best to act. 

Moreover, scarcely anything can be more censurable, than this 
habit of always crying out at every suggestion of improvement, 
impracticable ! impracticable ! Would it not be better for our 
" wiseacres" to spend their energies in the consideration of prin 
ciples, and of what things would be useful, and how to make 
them practicable, rather than in this eternal speculation about 
what will be successful ? And hardly any minor matter hinders 
improvement so much as this eternally choking down every 
thought of, and every aspiration for, something better, under 
the chilling contempt of impracticable ! impracticable. 

And after all, we beg to remind our readers, that we have 


very little concern about practicability. The law of right, as 
Spencer says, will not be still npfr be altered, by our imperfec 
tions, or present inability to fulfill it. Our business is to endeavor 
to study out what is right, and what ought to be ; and then to 
leave practicabilities to Time, to God, and to the statesmen, 
deeply feeling however, that all that moralists can do in regard 
to men individually or govern mentally, is to point out and 
urge upon them, their duties, and then pray for them : and those 
societies which after all, will not do the good, will certainly reap 
the evil, socially as well as individually. Social Science pro 
poses to accomplish its good effects, only indirectly. In this 
respect it is like the relation of Theology to piety. Nothing 
but the Divine spirit, working in the patriotism and equity of 
the people, can peacefully develop the powers which would be 
able and willing to accomplish thorough reforms. 

There are many other points that might have been touched 
upon in this Introduction, but we have endeavored all along, to 
defer them to their respective places in the subsequent parts, and 
to retain in the Introduction only such thoughts as are either too 
general, or too complex, to find appropriate places anywhere 
else. Hence its parts sometimes may have seemed fragmentary. 
And so on the other hand, of the ideas that have been set forth 
in the Introduction, but few will be touched upon in the remain 
ing parts, and but seldom, except when giving them as the 
topics of further elucidation. 






IN" order now to understand our idea of a Precinct, all the 
usual legal idea and identification of Precinct with Corporation, 
must be entirely banished and annulled. And almost every 
thing that a Corporation is, a Precinct, according to our theory, 
is NOT. See Corporation I. (A) & II. 1. 1 to Y. But a Pre 
cinct is as much a fundamental Element or Unit of society, as 
Individual or as Family or as Nation. Furthermore, in order 
to get the true idea of a Precinct, we must presuppose a general 
knowledge of the Individual, the Family and the Social Circle; 
which Elements, for convenience' sake, we postpone the consid 
eration of for- the present. 

Precincts are neighborhoods organized into civil governments ; 
they are territories within territories ; they are parts of a tribe 
or Nation, and are not self-existent. In other words, Precincts 
are the organizations of the neighborhood principle, in civil 
government. They might be compared with the " states" of the 
American Union, by calling them very small and REFORMED 

The Precinct is the fourth fundamental Element or "person 
ality" of society, as determined in our Analytics. It is also the 
fourth UNIT as mentioned in the ascending series of the six 
great Units. That series is thus : Individual, Family, Social 
Circle, Precinct, Nation, Mankind. 

But Precinct must be completely distinguished (in oar theory) 
from Corporation, which is of a different genus, and is the 


126 BK. II. PRECIXCT. 1. II. 

seventh Element of the Analytics. Yet Corporation is ever 
tending towards becoming a Unit, that is to say, a fundamental 
element, but yet cannot be assumed to be entirely fundamental, 
at least this early in the science, nor this early in the progress of 
the human race. 

As was said before, the Tribe-principle of human society, is, 
in the early ages, undeveloped and unanalyzed ; but in the later 
ages, this Tribe-principle develops into heterogeneity, and takes 
three distinct forms, namely, Social Circle, Precinct, and Corpo 
ration. The Precinct therefore, is a fundamental element both 
.of Developed Society and of the Tribe-principle. 

Of our great six Units of society, only two are political in the 
full sense of the term, namely, Precinct and Nation. Of these 
two, which may therefore be called the fundamental political 
elements of society, the lowest, or the first one in order, is the 
Precinct, namely, the element now immediately before us. Again, 
of these six Units, three are Units of Locality, namely, Pre 
cinct, Nation, and Mankind; and of these three, Precinct of 
course is the smallest and lowest. To determine the size of the 
Locality and the extent of the population of a Precinct, are 
problems attempted in a subsequent part of this article. But 
an exact definition of a "Precinct" in our theory, cannot be 
given intelligibly, without further knowledge of the theory itself. 

We will now give ; First : A general view of the Theory 
of the Precinct. Second : Some special Arguments for this 
Theory. Third : A conclusion pointing towards some partial 
Practical applications of the Theory, possible in, (without an 
alteration of the Constitution of,) the United States. 


1 . In General History. 

The history of states and Nations in a living progression, 
constantly tends to meet the changing problems of a larger popu 
lation, for the same territory and for the same representation. 
And this produces fundamental changes of some of the princi 
ples and rights of the governments themselves. And the great 
est cause or source of social and political evils, is, adhering to 
"worn out" systems, whose utility is more and more passing 
away by the merely natural growth of society itself. 


Non-subdivision for fundamental Units, and especially for 
Precincts, seems to us to be the greatest general cause of social 

The decay of Nations in general, it is true, is attributed to 
various causes : but writers seem to have passed by with little or 
no attention, that great cause which has operated in and over 
all the others. 

At the spontaneous origin and foundation of government, we 
find the separate Localities or Precincts to have great power 
within themselves and over their own territories. But in the 
course of time, population increases, Precincts which had small 
populations come to have large. Thus it follows, that laws 
which were suitable for the former, are no longer suitable for 
the latter; the country and the government become rife with 
cruelty and corruption; new and more stringent laws are added, 
in the vain hope of stemming the tide of new evils. Also, old 
and bad laws which could not be enforced at all, because of the 
sparseness of population and its uncivilized independence, and 
whose crudity was balanced by their impracticability, now be 
come practicable against honest and orderly citizens, and become 
enforced against them ; whilst the dishonest, the disorderly and 
those who still continue uncivilized in heart, escape. Thus vice 
is rewarded, and honesty and virtue punished ; and thus, classes 
of outlaws are fostered and nourished in the midst of civiliza 
tion. Then, more laws are tried, and laws are heaped upon 
laws; as the Precincts, now called states, become more and more 

The state, in each case at first, is merely a little band of ac 
quaintances. But gradually the population increases, the "state" 
becomes a great and complex political body; it never subdivides, 
but the overgrown and .still growing enormous complexity, and 
distant and unfeeling organization, still continues to regard itself 
as the fit source of all absolutism, and the fountain of all civil 
power. For convenience' sake to be sure, counties and townships 
are organized ; but not as subdivisions of the state, or of the 
original fountains of right, but only as mere organs of the over 
grown state, and dependent upon the absolute will of the great 
power, as to every thing IT chooses to exercise that power for. 

All the while, the simple common sense expedient is over- 


looked, of merely dividing and subdividing the states, as fast 
as necessary to keep pace with the increase in the numbers of, 
and also with the increase in the density of, the population. 
For, simple increase in density of population, increases the op 
portunities both to conceal crimes and to commit them ; and 
hence, as the population increases at one rate, the subdivisions 
should increase at a greater rate, thus, to counteract the in 
creased facilities for evil, made numerous, partly by mere density 
and its attendant subdivision of occupation, and partly by mere 
numbers ; the necessity caused by competition, of each one's at 
tending more and more exclusively to his own business, and con 
sequently neglecting public affairs and general culture ; and the 
necessarily increasing ignorance as to the character of the indi 
viduals, and as to the secret aims and motives of the various 
politicians and their parties. 

If now, on the other hand, the subdivision into new states 
had more than kept pace with the increase of population, and 
had also been regulated in proportion to increased density, then 
the natural ingenuity of men would have devised practical and 
successful methods, ever new, and ever varying, as might be 
necessary, to counteract the new and old evils aiming to grow 
up or to hide themselves in the new phenomena of progressive 
society and advancing civilization. 

This subdivision of Precincts (or states) is just as necessary 
as the subdivision of Families. Here again the Family is the 
type of society. And we notice this to be the case, even in the 
peculiar points relating to density and to advanced civilization. 
In the early stages of society we find married children remain 
ing with their parents, and the Family consisting of two or 
more sets of sub-Families, and quite numerous; but as the num 
bers and density increase, this complication of the Family be 
comes less and less frequent^ but gradually, the formation of 
every new Family, or even the attainment to maturity without 
marriage, causes men, as they become able, to go out and form 
new Families or new social connections of some kind. Thus, 
the natural history of the Family, typifies what that of the Pre 
cinct ought to be. 

2. In United-States-History. 

The average population of each of the states, at the time of 


the American Revolution, was not greater than 250,000. Sev 
eral had but 70,000. The present average is over one million 
(1,000,000). Some, as New York, Pennsylvania, &c., have 
from three to five millions. And the course of things has the 
same bad tendency. 

The population of an average congressional district is at pres 
ent about 150,000, and will increase; because the number of 
representatives is limited by the nature of things. Contrast 
these numbers with the numbers represented in the early stages 
of our Republic, and we find that now, each representative dis 
trict contains about ten times the number of persons it then did. 

And furthermore, considering affairs within the Precinct, we 
remember that some of the little colonies of America, settled by 
our forefathers, and consisting of only a few hundreds of in 
habitants to each, were carefully and well managed, by the prin 
ciple of direct Democracy, and the submission of the laws to the 
direct vote of the people, who all resided within convenient dis 
tance of each other. Thus our constitutions were made, only 
providing for states with populations of an average of only 
about 70,000, and they a scattered plain industrious country 
people, living close to nature and to social realities, and not used 
to " shams." But now the states have become so large that the 
citizens cannot possibly have any intimate knowledge of, nor 
much feeling of intimacy towards, each other. Yet we ignore 
the fundamental changes involved, we give the same rights to 
these larger bodies that the smaller originally possessed ; and 
this, without the knowledge, the neighborly feeling, the mutual 
observations, or the sincere naturalness, inseparable from small 
country populations and communities living and working in 
close neighborhood. 

The states and their constitutions were originally reactions 
against civil, feudal, and religious tyranny. And against ab 
sentee government, so generally worse than a present govern 
ment. The settlements also had a peculiar origin, having been 
made chiefly by peculiar classes, viz. : adventurers for gold, 
persecuted religious sects, &c. 

And subsequently to the revolutionary war, the Constitution 
of the United States, was itself an apparently necessary reaction 
against entirely indep and quarreling states ; not necessa- 



rily confederated too little, but without power to administer their 
confederation-laws AT ALL. This reaction, like the reactions 
of society generally, is an extreme. It has failed in what it 
sought, namely, the permanency of Union without internal war. 
But, the consolidation or centralization which it shunned, is 
coming upon us by the natural growth of so large a body, and 
by the necessary circumstances of purchasing new territory, and 
maintaining the Union by war, and the extreme reactionaiy 
theories consequent thereupon. 

The rights of Precincts are inalienable in principle, and un 
quenchable in feeling. And the violation thereof is almost sure 
sooner or later to bring bloodshed. The real cause of the 
American Rebellion, was a neglect of Precinct and corporation 
rights by both North and South. The Northern free-men 
WOULD go among slaves and preach insubordination ; and the 
Southerners demanded to go and to take their slaves with them 
any where they pleased. It was not the demand of the South 
erners to take their slaves to the new territories, but the claim 
to go North to arrest fugitives, and even to take the slaves with 
them through and into the free North, that really "fired the 
Northern heart." 

These views might, at one time, have seemed to imply a vain 
claim of every little Precinct to " secede." But now, the con 
trary doctrine being settled by war, makes this question less 
difficult. The arrangement into small states, such as our theory 
proposes, would have prevented any great attempt at secession ; 
and the present " United States," if organized into very much 
smaller states, would make even the IDEA of " State-Right Se 
cession" quite preposterous. And the smaller the Precincts are 
made, the more preposterous would be such a claim. But this 
subject is considered subsequently in this book. 

The real justification for interference by the Nation, with the 
affairs of the Slave-Precincts, is that these latter totally ignored 
'the rights of the colored race either to Precincts or to Corpora 
tions. I mean this would be a justification in time of peace, 



1. Relations to the Six Units. 

We have endeavored in the Summary Introduction, to estab 
lish the doctrine that there are six natural Units or measures of 
right, or as Mulford might call them " Moral personalities," in 
herent in the constitution of society, namely, Individual, Family, 
Social Circle, Precinct, Nation and Mankind; and that each 
unit is typical of all those above it, and vice-versa. Accordingly 
no one unit has any such superior right over the one next below 
it, but what that in turn has a similar right over the one below 
IT ; and so on. If there are any exceptions to this, they are in 
favor of the two extreme units, namely, one, Mankind, as the 
whole and absolutely the superior ; the other, the Individual, as 
the ultimate social atom not capable of any further social sub 
division. Therefore nationality cannot absorb Precinct-rights, 
any more than Family can absorb Individual rights, or any one 
element absorb the other's rights. It is therefore error, to en 
deavor as some do, to take away the natural rights of Precincts 
and to enumerate them as if they were mere corporations, and 
to single out the Nation as the only unit having real and original 
governmental power. Because all Precincts are " free and equal" 
in their sphere, as Individuals are so, or, as Nations are. 

The sovereignty of a Nation over its Precincts consists, not in 
any wizard power or talis manic right of the idea, Nation, but 
simply in a VASTLY superior DEGREE of power over the same 
locality ; hence, of the same sort of power, and with the same 
sort of right, as would be exercised by any very large, say Conti 
nental Coalition of Nations. We have had foreshado wings and 
intimations of such coalitions in the past history of Europe, but 
only intimations. The empire of Russia is also an exhibit of 
the principle in a more permanent form. Degree in biology and 
in sociology it is true, (as was said in the Introduction), is more 
important than kind. But in this case it is also true, that the 
KIND of power which Nation exercises over Precinct^is the. same 
as Coalition, Confederacy or Empire exercises over Nation. 
And the vast difference in the DEGREE of power between the 
inferior and the superior, is what constitutes the right in each 
case, and therefore Nation cannot plead it, as against Precinct. 

132 B . K - II- PRECINCT. I. III. 

We may add, that the coalitions and empires above men 
tioned, are themselves, to the Nations, foreshadowings and 
intimations of the Unit Mankind. And, should the time ever 
arrive when Mankind itself would form into a Coalition or 
Empire, IT would exercise much more power ovQr those other 
Coalitions and Empires, than those Coalitions had exercised 
over Nations (for coalitions are not Units), and would exercise 
at least AS much power and right over the Nations, as they were 
doing over Precincts. Whether such a union of all Mankind 
is possible or not, before the coming of that Great Man " who 
is Lord of the whole earth," we cannot say, but suppose not. 
Yet the reference illustrates the principle. 

Again as to the relation of counties and townships to prov 
inces, and of provinces to states, and of states to Nations, we 
may derive the true light from the basis of our fundamental 
analogy, namely, the Family. A single Family occupies a 
certain locality, several such Families form a neighborhood, 
several neighborhoods a township, and so on, up to the general 

We cannot find here, any such clumsy arrangement as a prov 
ince a State or a Nation, (that is, an institution nearly at the end 
or summit of the political scale), being regarded as the foundation 
and source of all government rights, and upon which all others 
must depend, whether above it or below it. The Family-analogy 
carried out, shows us that what are called "state-rights" begin 
with the Family, and must gradually lessen with each step as 
you go up, till the general government itself is reached. In 
other words in general, each neighborhood must have the same 
power to freely fulfill its own methods, as a state itself has, so 
far as consistent with the rights of other Precincts; and still 
more generally we may say, that such are all the rights that any 
state has, or any Nation, or even, any World. 

It may be observed that largeness of power in Precincts, by 
no means involves the theory that they must be regarded as the 
superior source or origin of governmental powers. For instance, 
the feudal system, in its origin, most clearly and fully was based 
upon the theory that all power descended from the supreme or 
national government downwards ; and yet, it gave the utmost 
amount of liberty to each of its subdivisions of powers ; so that 


the inferior was only required to make acknowledgments of the 
inferiority, and to aid the superior in war. This is analogous to 
the Divine Government itself: all power coming down from 
God in theory, yet the utmost liberty is given to the Individual 
in practice. [Blackstone, B. I. ch. 4.] 

But of course, the general or national government is to exercise 
the same restraining power over Precincts, that it does over In 
dividuals ; that is, power restraining them from trespassing on 
the rights or " equal liberty of other" Precincts, or on the rights 
of removal of all Individuals who either are or ought to be 
citizens of other Precincts. 

The Precinct or Neighborhood principle, is the main modern 
enlargement of the tribe-idea. And the tribe-idea is originally 
the essence of the state. A familiar example is found in the 
Scottish Nation, which was composed of many clans, each having 
a separate government under its chief, although they were sub 
servient to the authority of their king. Tribes then are the 
original elements of Nations. And the centralization principle, 
carried to the extreme of claiming the Nation to be the source 
of civil power, is the result merely of military power and 
monarchical marriages. (See Paley's Political Philosophy, Bk. 
6, ch. 1.) 

Our theory is not at all the theory of the Paris Communists; 
for their theory ignores the elementary necessity of the Nation, 
and desires to recognize only Precincts confederated throughout 
the world, independently and irrespectively of the principle of 
nationality. Another point of difference, is, that the Paris Com- 
munisjts ignore the elementary character of the Social Circle, 
and aim to destroy all such circles. Other points of difference 
are, that the Paris Commune ignores the elementary character 
and fundamental rights of the Individual and of the Family. It 
denies the freedom and rights of Corporation. It also ignores 
THE DUTIES of Corporation, and the intimate relations existing 
between LARGE cities and their Nation, as pointed out in an 
other part of this article on the Precinct : for the totality of a 
large city is, in essence, a national corporation, although the 
separate Precincts of which a city consists are not so. Further 
more, the Paris Commune subverts all the elements of society 
except only one, namely, an iron bound, tyrannical and special 


form of the Precinct. Furthermore, that Commune is so utterly 
at variance with our whole theory, scientifically, metaphysically, 
morally and religiously, as scarcely to be susceptible even of 
comparison with it. 

Our theory of the relation of Precincts to the Nation, namely, 
many centers instead of one, is the same principle applied to 
government, which Carey applies so successfully to economy. 
Indeed, his system of decentralization of the places of manu 
factures and commerce and intellect, would be greatly promoted 
by ours, of decentralizing the places of government. Never 
theless, the bases of the two theories are different : his basis, is, 
upon property and utility ; ours, is, upon personality and human 

2. Excess of centralization. 

A work has lately appeared by Mr. E. Mulford, on "The 
Nation." Although learned and conceived in an Orthodox 
spirit, and having a similarly high moral aim as our work, yet 
it seems to ignore the fundamental rights of the Precinct. It 
recognizes but one political unit or integer, that of the Nation. 
It seems in some places to use the word commonwealth in a 
sense approximating that of our word Precinct. It maintains 
that the " Nation is the institution of rights/' even including the 
right of property therein, (pp. 94 and 95.) This is a fearful 
" variation" on Paley's perverted but yet general assertion, that 
the foundation of the right of property (at least in land) is "in 
the law." It claims a right of the Nation to interfere even 
with the Family relation : and yet it says, " the Family exists 
in an organic relation to the Nation," (p. 284.) And yet small 
as the rights of the Family are admitted to be, it reduces the 
rights of the "commonwealth" to an indefinitely lower degree. 
Thus it says, " In the processes of society, the Family exists in 
an organic, and the commonwealth in a formal relation to the 
Nation." And again, in table of contents it says, " the com 
monwealth is the civil corporation." And again (p. 307) it 
says, " the commonwealth is a formal organization." 

We answer, that Mr. Mulford continually through the work, 
confuses the idea of government, with that particular part or 
organ of government called the Nation, and claims for IT all the 
blessings and benefits that are usually claimed for any depart- 


ment of government. Our whole work and general theory are 
so very different from his, that we cannot even contrast one with 
the other in any better way than by saying, that ours is founded 
on six foundations, and his on only one. We could easily prove 
that all he says of the substance of the Nation, is equally true 
of the substance of the Precinct, in its due proportion. (See his 
first chapter.) We argue that the Precinct also " is founded in 
the nature of man, is a relationship, is a continuity, is an or 
ganism, is a conscious organism, is a moral organism, is a moral 
personality :" and all quite as truly so, as the Nation. 

Mr. Mulford's theory in another part- is, that the distinction 
between the rights of a commonwealth (or Precin -^ and those 
of the Nation, consists in this, that the Nation has the political, 
and the commonwealth the civil rights. But what is the guar 
antee of civil rights, when political rights are denied? This 
question may be asked, as well where the rights of Precincts are 
ignored, as where those of individuals are so. And the pre 
tence that civil rights are sufficient without political rights to 
guarantee them, belongs to a past age. Accordingly, all the 
military rights of the Precinct, except as police, are ignored 
by him : thus (p. 299) he says, " When the governor is repre 
sented as the ( commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the 
commonwealth/ the office is not further defined." * * * The 
title he says " is a name for which there is no reality, and except 
for lawyers it leads beyond all soundings." * * * " And the 
governor in this character, on the streams to which he may be 
confined, is like Wordsworth's fisherman, ( tricked out in proud 
disguise' " (!) 

But then again, this distinction between (t political" and 
"civil," is insufficient, even according to Mr. Mulford. And 
not only does the Nation- possess concurrent civil powers, but 
also superior ones ; and this he argues, even to the extent of 
interfering with the Family, which even he admits to be a sep 
arate integer (or unit) of society. Accordingly (pp. 297, 298) 
he says : " The administration in divorce * * * passes consist 
ently to the commonwealth, but the Nation has an immediate 
obligation in the maintenance of the Family, * * * and if it fails 
to attain this, in its action through the commonwealth, it is im 
perative that it shall assume its immediate authority." Again, 


in regard to education in the public schools, he says, " while the 
administration of a system of education may be referred to the 
commonwealth, its institution is of national importance, and 
also of national obligation ; and in the defect of the common 
wealth, its authorization should proceed from the Nation/ 7 

In another place (p. 315), Mulford draws the distinction be 
tween "State" and "Nation" to be between "civil" and "moral' 7 ; 
making the Nation the moral organism. (! suppose he means, 
moral unit.) According to this theory, the Nation is both the 
political and moral unit of supremacy. But as a whole, Mr. 
Mulford's theory is all -summed up in the distinction of a " cen 
tral government and a local administration ;" but yet he refuses 
to accept that as the statement of his theory, and he devotes one 
page (viz. 317), to arguing against a theory that underlies and is 
the foundation of his whole book ; for there are but three other 
possible theories of state-rights, as he says, (p. 309,) and he ob 
jects to them all ; and endeavors to avoid the difficulty by saying 
(p. 309) that " the relation (between State and Nation) is funda 
mental that it is a necessary conception," but that "only in 
their substance" this relation is realized ; and charging that 
these other theories' comprise mainly the phases which the 
subject has assumed in "abstract speculations and legal pre 
sumptions." This is as if the discussion of an abstract prin 
ciple was adjourned in the supreme court, and transferred to the 
patent office to find a model ! For it is with " abstract specula 
tions/ 7 that we are dealing : and the charge of " legal presump 
tion 77 belongs to the other side. 

" We agree that the relation is fundamental, 77 and that " this 
relation is realized only in their necessary conception. 77 But 
the question is, which relation is fundamental, and what is the 
necessary conception of it? A re-perusal of his preface, more 
especially of pp. V and vi, seems to show that much of his dif 
ficulty arises from confusing the laws of social science which 
treat of its progress as a science, with th^ laws which treat of 
the progress of society itself. We have endeavored to point 
out the distinction between these things, in our Introduction 
even from its very beginning. But we also feel that he is 
systematically and upon principle, partial to the claims of 
nationality; ! ecause, when giving the rights of a Nation, he 


claims for it a right to acquire foreign territory without paying 
much attention to the wishes of the territory to be acquired, but 
in giving the rights of a State he does claim for it a right not 
to be alienated or transferred. And what else does this mean, 
but that we have a right to acquire peaceably a state from Great 
Britain, Spain, Germany, &c. ; but that they have not a right to 
acquire a state from us ? And what is this but the old egotistic 
Americanism, that said, foreigners had a right to be naturalized 
into the United States, yet that a citizen of the United States 
could not be naturalized into any other Nation ? But later de 
cisions of our Supreme Court have reversed this old egotism, as 
to the Individual ; and Social Science is reversing this theory as 
to States. The same unwritten constitution which allowed us to 
acquire Louisiana and Florida, without even precedent, would 
also allow us, if great necessity arose and the consent of a state 
were given, to transfer it to some other Nation, or to give it total 
separation. But of course, the expediency is -quite another ques 
tion. Nor would our principles apply to the alienation of any state 
except what was on the borders, as Louisiana and Florida were. 

This much, however, we grant to Mr. Mulford's claims for 
the Nation. If a Precinct neglects its duties of education, or 
morality, the Nation has a right to use reasonable MORAL means, 
instruction, persuasion, &c., to produce improvement therein. 
And furthermore, the Nation has a right to enforce, that no 
Individual or Family or Social Circle shall be forcibly and 
unjustly deprived of its rights by a Precinct. Yet still these 
rights may sometimes be nothing more than a right to compen 
sated emigration. 

Furthermore we admit, that after Precincts were restored to 
their natural rights, as fundamental Units; then much of what 
Mr. Mulford says of "commonwealths" would be true. For 
then commonwealths would be, what LARGE cities also ought to 
be regarded, namely, organs of the Nation: but their parts, 
absolutely as Precincts. 


1. In General. , 

Our theory may be stated in its most general expression, thus : 
Every Locality should be independent of surrounding Locali- 

138 BK - n. PRECINCT. I. IV. 

ties, except in tilings which are incompatible with the rights of 
other Localities, or of Individuals, or with the general progress 
of the whole. 

The idea may be presented in another way, and one that 
accords with the common politics of the day, as if foreshadowing 
a true Precinct self-government. One man advocates, allowing 
each township to decide for itself, its method of voting, another, 
its police organization, another, its question of liquor, another, 
of dogs, another, of sheep, another, of flowers or grain, another, 
of tobacco, another, of Sunday, another, of church, another, of 
school, another, of woman suffrage, another, of marriage or 
divorce, another, of customs of dress and equipage, and so on. 
Now our theory is, to arrange to let each Precinct judge all these 
questions together, for itself. And this would merely be a prac 
tical acknowledgment of the freedom and rights of the Precinct. 
2. Adaptations. 

Our theory of Social Science reconciles into one, the two prin 
cipal contending theories. That theory like Spencer's which 
reduces the powers of government to a minimum, we apply to the 
supreme government of the whole Nation ; or the highest gen 
eralization and largest organization of the people. Whilst the 
other theory, which like that of Comte and many other French 
men, gives to government the maximum amount and diversity 
of powers, we apply only to the very smallest local or Precinct 
organization, whose powers- are somewhat analogous to those of 
our individual states in the United States. 

And now in order to secure individual liberty as far as pos 
sible, these Precincts are not only to be made as small as possible, 
but provision is to be fully made by the general government, for 
the free safe and practicable removal of every citizen, with the 
proceeds of his property, except in case of crime as set forth by 
said general government or at least within limits allowed by it. 

In order to accomplish this result, it would seem necessary to 
commit to the courts of the general government in each Pre 
cinct, a concurrent power of Habeas Corpus, and of the sale of 
property for persons ordered to emigrate, or who perhaps were 
merely desirous to depart voluntarily. Or else peculiar courts 
might be organized, composed of one-half Precinct-judges and 
powers, and one-half general-government-judges and powers; 


with the provision that in case of disagreement, the party should 
have right to sell and leave, under the general government's 

This arrangement allows every sort of persons to find the?r 
like, and to reside together and carry on their government on 
plans that would very nearly enable them to be unanimous, and 
in Precincts so small as would make it easy for persons to travel 
from one to another. It is obvious however, that under this 
arrangement, the banished party should come under heavy pen 
alties for re-entering his former Precinct without permission ; 
and extra care should be taken to prevent this result. 

It is easy to see the logical and philosophical relation here, of 
general-government-authority, to the special Precinct-authority; 
because the words government and Precinct might be omitted, 
and we could treat of the subject by simply saying general au 
thority and special authority, and consistently give the general 
powers and those for direct general influence, to the general au 
thority ; and the special power or power for special local pur 
poses, to the special or limited authority. Thus the mere state 
ment of the thing, seems a good argument for it. 

3. Resemblance to international relations. 

The minutiae of rules and regulations for inter-Precinct af 
fairs, would be the same in substance, as those for international 
affairs, excepting of course, variations occasioned by the differ 
ences that necessarily exist between Precinct and Nation. And 
these minutiae would arise in nearly the same manner as inter 
national law : accordingly the reader is referred to that subject and 
to NATION, for a consideration of them. The true system of re 
ciprocal law for Precincts (when exhibited) will be very nearly 
the true system of international law, when once that system has 
attained any thing near perfection; ignoring of course the in 
admissible pretensions of secession. In fact, the best proof of 
the perfect arrangement and analysis of international law, will 
be its applicability nearly all through, to the Precinct, and its 
allowing both subjects to be treated together, pointing out their 
general sameness, and their occasional differences. 

A prominent feature of the theory is or should be, that Pre 
cincts should be allowed to form new confederations among 
themselves, under certain restrictions. The progress of society 

140 BK - IL PRECINCT. I. V. 

demands, that all circles or Precincts or associations of men, who 
are desirous or willing to do better to one another than human 
nature at large will as yet justify, must necessarily enter into 
mutual arrangements. This is the basis of all our great national 
and international beneficial orders, such as Odd Fellows, Ma 
sons, &c. Of course, nothing secret is meant or implied, in the 
Precinct-organization. This way of doing more justly and truly 
to one another, can only become general, by first exhibiting its 
superiority, by being adopted on the condition that each shall do 
so to the other. Therefore the preventing of such combinations 
in small Precincts, is absolutely preventing the progress of so 
ciety in its best moral features. 

In forming these leagues, no restriction is mentioned that 
they must be adjoining, nor need they be, because their small- 
ness is the protection against rebellion. A limit might be placed 
to the number that should enter into any one league, so long as 
any danger was apprehended from such a source. 


1 . Description of Amalgams. 

By an Amalgam we mean a small Precinct with fundamental 
natural powers ; but yet so leagued with each of its IMMEDIATELY 
contiguous Precincts that its power is partly limited by them, 
and on the mutual condition that each of the other Precincts is 
limited by the same PRINCIPLE, but of course not limited by 
exactly the same identical Precincts, for that would be geograph 
ically impossible with the principle. As the idea appears to be 
original with us, we will try to make it plain. 

The legislature and government of each Precinct, (which we 
might call its Amalgam-Directors,) might consist of one or two 
or four or of some even number of persons, chosen by each adjoin 
ing Precinct, together with a number chosen by the Precinct 
itself, equal to the total of those chosen by all the adjoining 
Precincts. Thus for instance, if a Precinct were surrounded by 
and contiguous to, say four adjoining Precincts, which is about as 
small a number as is usually probable; and if each such Precinct 
furnished two directors, that would be eight, and the Precinct 
itself should appoint the other eight, and thus the smallest common 
Board of Amalgam-Directors for any Precinct would be sixteen. 


Almost the only cases in which the number of Precincts in 
any one Amalgam, would be less than four, would be the cases 
of Precincts on the frontiers of any Nation. In these cases, 
each given Precinct would have at least one sjde, namely the for 
eign side, which would not be adjoined by another Precinct of 
the same Nation. In such cases, the wisdom of a national gov 
ernment would be to plan the division, of the Precincts on the 
frontiers, with special reference to this difficulty, so that no Pre 
cinct need ever have less than three others, and seldom less than 
four others adjoining it. On the frontiers the Nation should 
appoint a share of the Amalgam-Directors. 

A regular rectangular division into Precincts, similar to the 
plan of government surveys of public lands, would make every 
internal Precinct to be surrounded by eight others, and then the 
minimum of Amalgam-Directors would be sixteen: or if two 
from each, then thirty-two. 

The special reason for an even number from each Precinct is, 
that thereby some balance of power might exist, say one half of 
each may be elected by the elder persons and the other half by 
younger persons ; or any other balance that might be proper. 

The number might be increased to four, and then a possibility 
would arise of having majority votes of each Precinct, if that 
be considered any advantage, although it is not so considered by 
the writer. 

The total Directors elected by the Precinct itself, should be so 
arranged, that each (say) two of them, together with the corre 
sponding two from the any one of the other specified Precincts 
in regard to and with which there was any particular matter, 
should be a joint committee to superintend and arrange all minor 
difficulties, intercourse and joint operations, exclusively concern 
ing and between their own two specified Precincts themselves ; 
subject of course, in important cases, to the confirmation or re 
fusal of their proceedings by the Amalgam-Directors of either 
or both the Precincts concerned, and to other legal action. 
2. Argument for Amalgams. 

The description already given seems to contain a pretty good 
argument of itself. The spirit to " do unto others as you would 
that they should do unto you," must have its governmental form. 
Leagues of an original and peculiar kind between ADJOINING 


Precincts, are absolutely necessary. Every Precinct, as it if- 
LOCALLY the centre of a neighborhood of Precincts, and also 
is a part of the neighborhood of every contiguous Precinct, so 
it should be made LEGALLY such. In other words, every Pre 
cinct should be the centre of a small Amalgam, or small council 
of amalgamated political and civil authority, exercising propor 
tions of the. power of all the Precincts in the Amalgam, but yet 
exercising that power on only the central one of each Amalgam. 

The Amalgam, in the first place, is necessary for the sake of 
police uses chiefly, and to prevent offenders from escaping with 
impunity into adjoining Precincts before a proper police can be 
called. But there are also other advantages. The Amalgam 
would also prevent any one Precinct from deviating too widely 
or too suddenly from its immediate neighbors ; such overwide 
deviations shocking the consciences of neighbors, or producing 
riots or other great evils. 

Society is not a manufacture nor a building, but a growth and 
a life. Hence the old method of counties subdivided into in 
dependent Precincts, which make a merely mechanical structure, 
can never be a proper or perfect form for life-processes. What 
we propose here, is strictly analogous to the interchange of pro 
cesses of living bodies. This organization is entirely different 
from the common one, whether of States or Nations, and is per 
fectly analogous to the life of Individuals and also of Families. 
Each one is the centre of one life, and at the same time, is an 
adjunct in the periphery of every contiguous one. But yet, the 
Amalgam is not itself a Fundamental Unit of society. But the 
Precinct is that Unit. Nor is this theory of Amalgams any es 
sential part of our general Theory of the Precinct ; but is only 
one of its higher susceptibilities, and one which would be likely 
to develop out of necessary inter-Precinct police organizations. 


1 . The most obvious points. 

(a) In general The comparison of the Precinct-system here 
proposed, with the present states under the U. S., may be 
summed up by saying, that some of the powers of each indi 
vidual state (i.e., small Precinct,) would be assigned to the Pre- 


cinct, or to the Amalgam with its surrounding Precincts ; and 
some of these powers would be assigned to the Nation : whilst 
on the other hand, some of the powers of the Nation would be 
assigned to the individual Precinct, or to its Amalgam with its 
surrounding Precincts. 

No Precinct would be in amalgam or league with only one set 
of Precincts ; because every one of them would form a part of 
as many different Amalgams, as it touched Precincts which sur 
rounded it, plus one more necessary Amalgam, namely, the one 
of which the Precinct was itself the centre ; and perhaps, plus 
such additional leagues, as under the national permission, it 
might form voluntarily with Precincts not touching it: but this 
latter is much less natural than the other. 

In this comparison with the States of our Union, we may say 
in general, the difference between the system of Precincts, and 
that of the States in the Union, consists in the vastness of their 
number, smallness of their size, arid the consequent facility of 
individual removal, secured by the national guarantees, com 
manding that Individuals should be compensated by the Pre 
cincts ordering removals. By these differences, free choices are 
secured for all, a new element of government is introduced, new 
organs created, new functions performed, and harmony and 
peace secured in the consciousness of personality in every Indi 
vidual, joined with mutual respect for the personality of all 
other persons. 

Every Precinct or small neighborhood, possesses by nature, 
and should have granted to it by law, the same rights for the 
most part, that the constitution of the United States grants to 
its States severally. But the very diminished size of our pro 
posed states, makes necessary a number of alterations or excep 
tions from the state-rights granted under the constitution ; and 
some of these alterations are diminutions of local power, and 
some are increases thereof; in other words, some " state-rights" 
should be allotted to the Nation and others to the Precincts. 
We may illustrate our general theory, by pointing out in detail, 
a few of these differences from the present government of the 
United States, upon the following named subjects. 

(b) Inter-Precinct affairs. The first class of differences con 
sists of inter-Precinct relations. The first difference, however, 

144 BK - n. PRECINCT, i. vi. 

might become very radical in nature. We do not regard any 
one Locality as being independent of the Localities which im 
mediately adjoin it. The Precinct itself can only have a legiti 
mate government, by admitting more or less political power to 
be exercised within it, by its immediately adjoining Precincts; 
and it in turn exercising a reciprocal power on each of them in 
Amalgams such as we have described above. 

The exact amount or proportion of this kind of inter-Precinct 
power, is not easy to determine, previously to experiment, unless 
by instinct. To us it appears that each Precinct should have an 
exactly EQUAL amount of political power to that of the SUM of 
the powers of all its immediately adjoining and contiguous Pre 
cincts. But to carry out this idea rigidly, according to the argu 
ments we shall hereafter pursue, would make it necessary to have 
each Amalgam or congeries of Precincts, as small as we there 
advocate for the single Precincts ; and would indeed make the 
single Precinct so small, as to make the theory at present appear 

For the " present distress" therefore, we need only advocate 
a congeries of police arrangements for Precincts. The police 
of each Precinct should be allowed to enter its adjoining Pre 
cincts when in pursuit of offenders immediately after the offence. 
Or still better, a consolidated police should be chosen for each 
Precinct, by an authority consisting, one-half of delegates from 
the immediately adjoining Precincts, and one-half by the Pre 
cinct itself in which they are to act more immediately, with the 
privilege of extending th,eir pursuits of criminals freely into the 
immediately adjoining Precincts. Some clauses of the constitution 
of the United States, have only a formal but not a spiritual 
opposition to our theory; that is to say, their objects are good, 
but their methods are incompatible with our proposed theory. 
For instance, "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance or 
confederation. And no state shall, without the consent of Con 
gress, enter into any agreement or compact with another state," 
&c. Incompatible : Because, no great moral improvements can 
be made, either by Nations, Precincts or Individuals, only so 
far as they are allowed and encouraged, to treat their friends or 
those who do well, better than they treat those who are not 
their friends or who do not well ; and only as they are allowed 


thus to treat one another better, on the condition of mutuality 
or special reciprocity. 

That part of the constitution of the United States, which in 
spirit is most at variance with our proposed radical theory, is its 
Article IV., especially the following extracts, 1 : " Full faith 
and credit shall be given in each state, to the public acts" &c., 
" of every other state." But under our theory, Precincts, like 
Individuals, would need to prove their credibility, to the satis 
faction of other Precincts. And 2 : " Citizens of each state 
shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens 
of the several states." But under our theory nothing of the kind 
would be possible long. For every Precinct would establish 
its own conditions for citizenship within itself. And 3 : " No 
new state shall be formed within the jurisdiction of any other 
state, * * * without the consent * * * of the Congress." But 
under our theory, Precincts must ever continue to subdivide, 
with the increase of population. Yet still, the consent of the 
congress is so far necessary, that it should provide the GENERAL 
laws and forms of proceeding for such subdivisions. Immi 
grants and sojourners should be judged by the Precincts into 
which they voluntarily come. Fugitives should be judged, not 
by the Precinct whence they escape, but by the Nation. The 
return of fugitives by force, except for causes approved by the 
Nation, is absurd: but by treaty with adjoining Precincts, is 

In order that each Precinct might have a reasonable oppor 
tunity to know that the inter- precinct regulations were carried 
out fairly, and to assist therein ; each should allow one Precinct- 
consular-agent from each of the immediately adjoining Precincts, 
to reside therein, at his own convenience, who should have all 
the immunities of person and Family that foreign consuls have. 
And the same privilege would have to be granted, of course, to 
a reasonable number of the agents of the general government. 

Disputes between residents of diiferent Precincts should be 
settled by parties selected from both, and should be decided 
according to the principles of arbitration. All disputes wherein 
a Precinct was interested, should be settled by principles and 
laws more general than those within the Precinct itself, yet still, 
according to the principles of arbitration ; whether the contend- 


146 BK - IL PRECINCT. I. vi. 

ing party were another Precinct, or whether it were the Nation 
itself; provided, that constitutional questions, in cases wherein 
the Nation is a party, should of course be determined by the 
courts of the Nation itself. Furthermore, all cases of dispute, 
as to whether any matter belongs to the Nation or not, should 
be carried by appeal to the national courts. 

There should be provided by the Nation, general laws for 
the declaration of national roads, &c., for the charter of new 
roads running through, say three or more Precincts ; but the 
details should be executed by the Precincts themselves through 
which they are to pass. But roads between only two Precincts 
could safely be left to the discretion of the Precincts concerned. 

Rivers and water courses, would come under the law of roads. 

All regulations of travel on roads declared national, should 
be retained by the Nation, or assigned to the Nation. But not 
so as to give any traveler a right to halt in objectionable places 
times or manners, nor remain long nor depart far from the road 
itself, without the consent of the Precinct. New roads not 
declared national, entering more than three Precincts; and 
changes of the location of such, should require the consent of say 
three-fourths of the Precincts through which the road or changed 
location is to be made. 

(c) Affairs within the Precinct itself. The other class of dif 
ferences that would have to be pointed out, in this comparison 
with the constitution of the United States, relates to matters 
\vithiii the Precinct itself. 

Any Precinct should be allowed to establish for itself, as its 
own legal tender, a solvent paper-currency representing fairly 
any specified commodity or commodities of general use in the 
United States ; provided that no refusal to liquidate, according 
to the actual promises, should be allowed. 

The Nation should not assume to pass any bankrupt, or any 
other law releasing debtors, or otherwise interfering in such 
matters, except to secure the right of change of domicile. 

No Precinct should be allowed to make any general assign 
ment or forfeiture of private property to the public, under less 
than 50 or 100 years' notice, without compensation. This rule 
is needed to prevent agrarian outrages. And on the other hand, 
to prevent speculators from procuring such agrarian legislation 


and notices, merely that they might lay up property; and then 
after a ^ime, get the notices repealed. 

The right of Individuals to remove from a Precinct with the 
proceeds of their property, and the right to a free sale or trans 
fer of such property to the highest bidder in or out of such 
Precinct, should be guaranteed, except for crimes recognized by 
the Nation or by the genuine principles of morality. And then 
the penalties should not, excepting banishment, be in excess of 
those allowed by the Nation from time to time, for offences of a 
similar degree of criminality. 

There is one foundation for certain special Precincts, namely, 
a peace-foundation, which would require some further special 
enactments and principles; and which no doubt would be 
granted to them by the national government, namely, Pre 
cincts established on a peace-basis, should not be required to 
violate that basis by draft or otherwise ; and on the other hand, 
the voluntary formation and existence of such Precincts, would 
much facilitate the administration of the rules of war, in the 
other Precincts generally. Indeed, so clear are the rights and 
so important the uses of Peace-Precincts, that even before the 
institution of any GENERAL system of Precincts, these rights 
should be granted by easy charter from congress, or by general 

(d) Temporary restrictions of the Precinct-powers, would be 
necessary, for such a length of time as would preserve rights and 
secure safety under state-authority, until the plan could be safely 
and fully instituted, and the necessary changes and removals 
could be made. But to make the matter more plain, we will 
give a few details of those exceptions and reservations. 

States could pass laws for intercourse with contiguous states, 
and relating to contiguous operations ; but only to go into force 
at a certain future time, and on condition of the contiguous states 
adopting similar laws previous to that time. 

No person at any time, should be punished for offences against 
religion, in the exercise of freedom of conscience, by any other 
punishment than by requisition to remove from the district after 
12 months' notice. But in the beginning, this class of permitted 
orders of removal, should be suspended for 5 or 6 years after 
the adoption of the general plan, to allow plenty of time for the 

148 BK - H- PRECINCT. I. VI. 

settlement of present interests, and vested rights, and for due 
deliberation. And all persons removing by order, at any time, 
should be paid a sum sufficient to enable them and their fami 
lies, if any, to travel to the nearest Precincts or neighborhoods 
where they would be allowed to remain, so far as a knowledge 
of their character possessed at that time, would render their 
stay admissible. Rates of compensation should be fixed by the 
national government ; unless otherwise agreed between the par 
ticular Precincts respectively concerned in each kind of removal, 
namely, the one forsaken and the one adopted. 

Also some special provisions of a greater length of notice, (say 
21 years) would be required for the affairs and the government 
of minors, and for fiduciary property; or such property might 
be sold according to existing state or national laws, if any, and 
be held by Trust Companies accordingly. 

To prevent injustice in the beginning, the Nation's Criminal 
Law and perhaps also its whole Civil Law, should be carefully 
improved, not by tricky "digests," but by all known necessary 
statutes : And then by a clause, that it should remain unal 
tered for say JO years. This would allow political and social 
dissenters, time to sell out and remove. - 

It might also make the transition seem safer and more satis 
factory to some persons, if, for the few years during the transi 
tions, the privilege of appeal to the Supreme Court of the Na 
tion were allowed and reserved for all important cases. But the 
suggestion is only to satisfy the timid, and to be temporary in 
its nature, for obviously, the permanent existence of such a rule 
of appeal, would become, or at any rate, might easily become 
tantamount to the entire nullification of all the essential rights 
and benefits of the plan itself. 

2. Points of the comparison needing further illustration. 

(a) Commerce and the Legal Tender. In comparing the pro 
posed Precinct-system with the constitution and system of the 
United States, there are several points which seem to need 
further elucidation than what could be given to them in the 
foregoing general views. Let us now proceed with them. 

It may be doubted whether the legal tender ought to be en 
trusted to the Precinct. Now we admit that while law, whether 
of Precinct or Nation, may for extraordinary reasons, extend the 


time of fulfillment of contracts reasonably, or even depreciate, 
the common old currencies, by altering the legal tender, yet 
when the emergency is past, the old tender should be promptly 
restored : But that has hardly ever been done. We may also 
admit, that changes of so great a nature may arise, that a per 
manent alteration of the legal tender may become necessary. 
But obviously no such alteration should be made, otherwise than 
by alteration of the constitution itself. But experience proves, 
as we show under Property, that the question of changes in the 
legal tender, cannot safely be entrusted to national governments, 
because their control is too absolute, and competition too entirely 
slow in its effects thereupon. And all the serious troubles that 
have arisen from LOCAL currencies have arisen from their being 
irredeemable. Hence, all that the Nation ought to prescribe on 
the subject of the currency, is, that all promises of currency 
should be redeemable in the legal tender promised, with only 
such extensions of time as were duly provided for by law : 
otherwise, should be payable, one half in the currency of, ami 
under the regulations of, the promisor; and the other half in 
that of the promisee, or of the Preciacts of residence thereof. 
But the Nation has a right to see that no Precinct shall have 
one legal tender for its resident debtors, but a different one for 
its resident creditors ; nor that any other differences should be 
made except those which pertained strictly to Locality, such as, 
to the nearness of and known reliability of guarantors, when 
guarantors were necessary, in extensions of time. 

On the other hand, to the Nation, legitimately belong, the 
regulation of the subjects of WHOLESALE Commerce, domestic 
and foreign, and even the regulation of intercourse between 
Precincts so far as they had not entered into special agreements 
of their own. All the other matters must come under a merely 
general supervision of the Nation, so far as to see that neither 
Individuals nor Precincts, were brought under the application 
of laws to which they had not first actually knowingly and freely 
consented. Furthermore, these rights may safely be given to 
Precincts, because the right is guaranteed, of removal to such 
other Precincts as will receive the Individuals in question. 

6) Divorce. The most difficult cases to understand the pre 
cise effects of our theory in, are divorces, especially when there 

150 BK - II- PRECINCT. I. VI. 

are children. We may explain this difficulty thus : It is a part 
of <our theory. (1) That no Precinct should receive immigrant 
strangers, without evidence of the legitimacy of the immigration, 
satisfactory to its government. (2) If persons removed to other 
Precincts merely in order to get a divorce, and then to return to 
their original Precinct or some other, they, by this right of Pre 
cinct to examine character, would be excluded from all Precincts 
which disapproved of their course. (3) Few Precincts would be 
silly enough to allow divorce to new comers, especially where 
there were children to be supported, because such children would 
come upon the Precinct for support. (4) It is no part of our 
theory, to prevent persons who deliberately intend to try any 
social experiments, from assembling in Precincts by themselves, 
and reaping the full effects of their experiments, whether they 
be good or whether they be evil. But the Nation has the right 
to compel the support of the children &c. (5) It is a part of 
our theory, that the question of marriage and divorce is of too 
private a nature for the law to judge understandingly, especially 
without the concurrence of the Social Circle, and the moral and 
f religious organizations. (6) That whether divorced or single, all 
women are entitled to speciai assistance from government, and 
especially divorced women; and that the better class of Pre 
cincts, would voluntarily, and the others should be obliged to, 
provide for this right; and those Precincts which did not so 
provide, would not be very inviting to the women. (7) That 
the rights of Precincts we are advocating, are rights over their 
own citizens, not rights of contracts in which one party is a 
citizen and the other not. 

Still, we must admit, that length of residence, in order to 
have full rights, must have some reasonable limit. But even 
this is more safely left to competition among the Precincts, than 
to the monopoly ora distant central power, whose policy would 
continually fluctuate, with its probable influence on great totals 
of voters, and the probable need of such influence. Further 
more, the unlimited gift of such power to the Nation, might 
easily result in breaking up nearly all the advantages of the 
Precinct theory. But, for the further discussion of the princi 
ples of the Family, the reader is referred especially to that 
Element, and also to some parts of the discussion on Property. 


Here we observe this much however. The states which have 
led in hasty divorces, have been chiefly the new sta,tes with very 
sparse populations. The foundation-fault therefore has been, 
that same that we have to encounter every where in our national 
history ar,d politics, namely, the over hasty partitioning out of 
our new lands so much sooner than the wants of Mankind, or 
of civilization or morality, either required or permitted. 

The new system would require power to enforce the Precinct- 
principle, in cases of desertion of marital or family obligations. 

The right of free migration should be restricted then, if it 
could be, when the Precinct itself should render some aid to 
deserted women, and efficient aid to deserted children. The 
women, to be sure, should have the same chance to follow after 
their deserting husbands, that they now have under the ordi 
nary constitutions. But whether they should be allowed to take 
away young and helpless children, into all sorts of risks and 
dangers, is another question. If a Precinct fulfills its duties to 
its women and children, it naturally has the right of guardian 
ship over deserted children, until they attain to full age. Our 
theory is, that it is the duty of governments to care for the chil 
dren, and even to aid the women. But the causes of divorce 
are sometimes very private and very sacred. Nor can any civil 
government judge of such questions. But still, every Precinct 
should be allowed to try its own plan, under the national rules. 
And the Precinct's license of divorce, would and must be made 
to be held in balance by its duties to aid and protect the deserted 
women and children, which should be made obligatory, at least, 
as the condition of Precinct-divorces. 

It is almost certain, that the rule would soon become general 
among the Precincts, to require of immigrants, certificates or 
other evidences of good character, coming from other Precincts, 
at least those within the Nation. And these certificates would 
vary according to the nature and predominant ideas of the Pre 
cinct into which the immigrant would remove. Moral Precincts 
would require moral certificates; Hygienic Precincts, hygienic 
certificates ; Secular Precincts, secular certificates ; and so on. 
But probably most of them would soon require duly attested 
certificates of faithful performance of Family-obligations. Some 
would require such, for the sake of principle ; and some for the 


sake of preservation from a rush of social parasites, unwilling 
to maintain their own Families or be responsible for their own 

(c) Punishment of crime. Precincts must be required to hold 
their own criminals in duress, or else transfer them to a superior 
authority. The principle should be established, that although 
no Precinct should be required by superior government, to punish 
criminals beyond its own idea of justice and expediency, yet 
neither should any Precinct be allowed ever to avowedly permit 
great criminals, or even any habitual criminals, to emigrate to 
other Precincts. And this latter can only be avoided in some 
cases, by the Precinct passing all such criminals regularly over 
to some more general authority. Hence, the Precinct should 
not banish for any real or enormous crime, thus turning crimi 
nals loose on* other Precincts. And in the case of certain speci 
fied crimes, should not even allow the criminal to go at liberty. 
But if the Precinct does not approve of punishing him by hold 
ing him in duress securely enough or long enough, it must then 
pass him over to the more general authority, the Nation. Pre 
cincts, even as Nations, should be held accountable, if they per 
mit their inhabitants to "raid" against adjoining or neighboring 
ones, or against any others. 

The foregoing principles, would make necessary an exact re 
versal of the rule of the Constitution of the United States (Art. 
4, Sect. 2) in regard to the restoration of fugitive criminals, and 
the usual jurisdiction only by the Locality of the offence. Every 
government, Precinct or other, has the natural right to punish 
its immigrant criminals, even for crimes committed elsewhere; 
and that was often the rule in ages of simplicity and nature. 
Precincts like Nations, would require to make their own special 
treaties, in order to place themselves under a different order. 

(d) Division of Precincts. The just principle is that each Pre 
cinct should be allowed to divide at will, whenever, BUT NOT 
BEFORE, it had a population sufficient to make two or more Pre 
cincts, each having an AVERAGE of population of the rest of the 
Precincts of the Nation. This rule should apply even more 
strictly to the admission of new " states" or the transformation 
of mere rural territories into states, than to the division of al- 
re:Uy existing ones ; because the Nation evidently has more 


right over and more claims upon a state which and WHEN it 
makes, than upon one already existing. And while two senators 
are admitted from each state, the state itself should be divided 
into two separate senatorial districts, arranged expressly with a 
view to the probable subsequent division, and modified from 
time to time, to suit the changing probabilities of the expected 
lines of division. 

Most of our states that have been admitted, since the first 
ones, have had less than 100,000 inhabitants, at the time of their 
acknowledgment as states. And the average of most of them is 
50,000. But several that have lately been admitted as states, 
have had only about 10,000 (!) But in the census of 1870 New 
York has 4,382,000; Pennsylvania, 3,522,000; Ohio, 2,666,000; 
Illinois, 2,540,000 ; and so on (!) 

The seven states which inaugurated the great rebellion, had 
at the time only 82 J per cent, of an average state-population ; 
and only 51 per cent, of an average state- voting-population. 
And the thirteen which finally composed the rebellious confed 
eracy, contained but 92 per cent, of an average state-population, 
and only 66 per cent, of an average of the voters. Thus the 
statistics warn us of the danger of giving so much preference 
to square miles rather than to population, in admitting new 
" states" to the Union. Furthermore, the late financial panic 
helps prove the same conclusion ; for that panic was brought on 
chiefly by the over haste and consequent rottenness of the west 
ern Rail Road building. And if there is any one thing cor 
rupting the Congress of the United States more than any thing 
else, it is this preponderance given to Locality, and its connected 
speculation for " grabbing up" the new lands. 

(e) Rebellion of Precincts. One of the principal defects in the 
constitution of the United States, is the omission to provide ex 
pressly for the contingency of rebellion by states. But our com 
parison shall be very explicit on this subject. Rebellion by a 
state or Precinct, forfeits the political rights of that state or Pre 
cinct, as such. And the more united the Precinct had been, in 
its rebellion, the more just would this punishment be. Let us 
illustrate this. 

Nothing is clearer, than that the whole subject of the internal 
government of each of the states is, by the constitution, left to 

154 Bit. II. PRECINCT. I. VI. 

the government of the state itself. IF then, when a state re 
belled, it REALLY continued to be a state, it is evident that the 
general government would have no authority to administer the 
affairs of the Nation, so far as they involved that state, even 
during its rebellion, nor to settle its affairs any time afterwards, 
even after complete conquest. Such a conclusion would place 
the Nation at the mercy of a few states, and would be absurd. 
What part of the secession argument, then, it may be asked, is 
false ? Why, that which assumes that a state continues to be a 
state after it rebels. The fact of rebellion by a state as such, 
that is, by the state government as authorized and upheld by 
the regular majority of the voting people of that state, that 
fact per se, annuls the political rights of the state as a state, and 
remands it to the condition of a "territory" or "district." Just 
as certainly as the fact of an Individual's rebelling, naturally 
takes away his political rights, just so, the fact of a state rebelling 
by full authority of its political rulers and voters, takes away 
the political rights of that organization of voters, and of that 
moral charter or state sovereignty which it possessed. Unless 
this were so, you would establish as a principle, that a rebellious 
state, after being badly beaten, had nothing to do but to disarm 
its fighters, and return to the halls of congress to obstruct legis 
lation, withhold pay of the war debt, withhold pensions for the 
killed and wounded, and throw all its influence to injure the 
general . country and provoke wars with other countries ; and 
then rebel again. 

If a state does not forfeit its rights as a state by rebellion, 
then the general government must have disbanded its armies at 
once, after the fall of Richmond, and allowed the Southern 
rebels to resume their seats in congress, vote for ALL their 
Blacks, instead of for the f of them, which was all they were 
allowed to vote for before the war. This is just the kind of 
a settlement that might have been expected, if the result of the 
war had been exactly the opposite to what it was, and if the 
South had come off conquerors instead of the North, yet with 
out accomplishing an entire dissolution. In fact there is no way 
to justify either Congress or the President/ requiring any stipu 
lation or constitutional alteration to be accepted by a rebelled 
state, which does not imp'y that the rebelled state has lost its 


political rights, and is no longer a state at all, in the eye of the 
law or of the constitution. It is an established principle that 
war annuls all previous political contracts, except otherwise men-. 

Eebellion does not take a state out of the Union, but it takes 
its political constitution out of the constitution of the United 
States. Its territory remains as property, and its roads to be 
taken and traveled on ; its inhabitants remain to be governed 
and protected, as may be wise and reasonable; the rights of 
citizenship of loyal Individuals as Individuals remain unim 
paired, in the same manner as if residents of territories ; but 
their political state rights are gone, for tlie state is no more a 
state, but a territory or District like the District of Columbia, 
or like any western territory not yet admitted by congress. All 
the world over, wherever .one part of a country rebels, and is 
defeated and conquered, the governors of that region lose their 
political rights, until restored by the conquerors : and in this 
country, the governors of the rebellious states were the majority 
of the voters of those states, except perhaps in one or two of 
them. The political rights of that dynasty, therefore are for 
feited. The President's pardon cannot affect that subject, 
because it is not an Individual affair, but an affair of office, 
of majorities, and of the state government tself. 

Nothing in this argument, however, is to be so construed, as 
to deny the right of Precincts to rebel, upon sufficient cause. 
The conflict of arms results in general from the uncompromised 
conflicts of opinion, and which are useless to discuss any further. 
It is a resort to which every living thing which believes in 
fighting, has a natural right, upon just occasion. But after the 
resort to arms has been made and concluded in conquest, the 
rights of the conquerors are limited only by the laws of nations 
and by Christian morality. But the expediencies are a different 

(/) Separation of National from Precinct politics. To avoid 
confusing local interests and local parties, with national ones, no 
council or legislative body elected for Precinct affairs or Pre 
cinct purposes, ought to be chosen to select officers for national 
affairs ; but such ought to be selected according to a different 
division of parties, grounded upon an entirely different classifi- 


cation of ideas, and relating to an entirely different class of 
concerns. But to this, must be excepted questions concerning 
the division of a Nation or Precinct, or concerning the relative 
degrees of power or administration belonging to either. But, 
as every returning to such a discussion and division on this 
branch of the subject, tends to confuse inextricably the separate 
businesses and functions of the two great organs of government, 
it follows that something ought to be done to prevent constant 
or long continued political struggles, in this matter of the rela 
tion of Precinct to Nation. This might be accomplished per 
haps, by having conventions held, for the express purpose of 
remodeling the constitution of the Nation, at only certain regu 
lar intervals, say, every ten or fifteen years, in hopes that in the 
interim all question relating to the subject might have rest. 
Moreover and still better, to keep the different businesses and the 
two functions separate, the elections for National officers ought 
to be at as different times as possible. And as annual elections 
are frequent enough, it would be best that the elections for Pre 
cinct or Nation were held in alternate years or not often er, and 
not any nearer together respectively. And the longer time that 
could be allowed, consistently with other reasons, to intervene 
between the different kinds of elections, the more distinct they 
would be kept, and the better therefore would be the results. 


1. Conditions in general. 

Under this head we will first give the formula?, with some 
general arguments ; next, a few further thoughts on the condi 
tions of population; and then a few on the conditions of locality. 
The object here however, is not to L,O through the whole argu 
ment for small Precincts, which is reserved for the Second di 
vision of this Part, of the work. But assuming the general 
doctrine to be established, the particular problem, is to deter 
mine exactly how small the Precincts should be. This consid 
eration is placed before the other, 'n order the better to explain 
the nature of our theory. 

Precincts should be no larger in territory or population, than 
would admit of all the adult people, or at least all the voters, 


meeting conveniently in one assembly. And no larger than 
would allow the heads of Families as residents, to be gen 
erally acquainted with each other, at least by hearsay, yet not 
so small as to preclude the chances of reasonably furnishing the 
proper proportion of qualified governmental officials. 

This minimum of smallness is called for, because each Pre 
cinct of a perfected system, is required to derive considerable 
government authority from its adjoining Precincts, and be an 
Amalgam therewith; so that to have large Precincts, would 
require this Amalgam to be larger than would accord with the 
safety of individual personal liberty. Thus, each Precinct is 
the centre of one life, and at the same time, is a part of the 
circumference of life of every other Precinct adjoining it. 

The second idea to determine the size of Precincts, is the 
necessity of keeping local and national politics distinct. How 
ever small the legal organization of any territory or company, 
there will always be formed a few and never more than a few 
caucuses, cliques or parties ; voluntary subdivisions or suborgan- 
izations to affect the legal one. These subdivisions or suborgan- 
izations are formed on purpose to affect the legal organization, 
and grow out of it and cannot get far from it. This is the reason 
why there never can be more than a few of such parties, because 
as their number increases arithmetically, their power decreases 
geometrically. That there will always be at least two, or a few 
such subdivisions, is, because different human minds do not see 
or feel alike. From these considerations it follows that the Pre 
cincts ought to be small, so that the suborganizations which will 
arise in each, shall flow out of it voluntarily, and relate to the 
concerns of each immediate neighborhood itself; and for similar 
reasons, the amount of power and business given to the national 
or large organ, should be a minimum, or the smallest possible, so 
as thereby to cause ths least amount of interference with the 
business and concerns of the Precinct. In other words, these 
things should be so, in order to prevent local parties being 
formed upon national interests, or vice-versa. For instance, if 
Precincts were so small as to consist of only one Family each, 
and as Family questions would seldom be introduced into na 
tional politics, therefore such divisions would furnish the mini 
mum of confusion of the two kinds of polit . Again, if 


Precincts became a little larger, so as to consist of only a few 
Families each, the confusion would become rather more frequent, 
yet still would be comparatively rare, because the questions for 
consideration, would be still very local and very personal. 
Hence, the larger the Precincts are made, the greater will be 
the confusion of the two kinds of politics, and vice-versa. 
2. Conditions of population. 

As to the actual size of these Precincts, the most important 
consideration by far is density of population. The general 
theory points at from 10,000 to 20,000, as being the highest 
number that should constitute a Precinct, as this gives from 
1000 to 2500 adult men or voters to each, which is the highest 
number that can conveniently meet and consult. 

Election districts should not consist of a larger population, 
than would allow of all old or established residents, being tol 
erably well acquainted with each other's personal and business 
character, either by direct acquaintance and observation, or by 
common hearsay. If Precincts are larger than this, then their 
officers should be chosen by electors each of whom represents 
and is from an elective district as small as herein mentioned. 
But the smallness makes the direct voting by the people more 
practicable. For the larger the district or population, the less 
direct can the election be. And a vast deal depends upon the 
"Primary" elections. And our idea is to make the Precincts as 
small as the smallest district of primary elections, or as near that 
as possible. 

The utmost population should be such that all persons entitled 
to vote for any one branch of its government, should be able 
to meet in one building under cover, and so that any ordinary 
speaker could be heard from one end to the other. Thus, its 
size would vary with the number of voters. And whenever 
their number became too large to meet as described, either the 
Precinct would have to be divided, or an additional division be 
made of its representative houses, or an increase of age or other 
qualifications for suffrage. 

Smallness also secures to each of the people, mutual knowl 
edge of the other, and mutual good feeling, so that government is 
more practicable, and happiness more complete, all being agreed. 

On the other hand, it is desirable that the population of each 


Precinct, should be sufficient to enable it to select one repre 
sentative to the national legislature or congress, for itself, with 
out being joined in a congressional or senatorial district with 
any other Precinct, so long as it remains possible to avoid it. 
At the same time, the congress itself must not be larger than 
can conveniently meet, debate and consult. Now, a national 
population of Fifty Million, would require that each Precinct 
should contain at least Twenty Thousand average population ; 
because if less, then the congress would have to consist of more 
than Twenty Five Hundred members. Hence arises the neces 
sity of not making the Precincts smaller than are required by 
the fundamental conditions before mentioned. 

The only possibilities for allowing larger populations to the 
Precincts, lie in the direction, either of increasing the age of 
suffrage, or otherwise democratically lessening the number of 
voters, or else in the direction of the electoral colleges or houses 
of delegates, for the special purpose of electing all general offi 
cers. And these delegates must be FREE, not pledged to vote 
for any particular candidates. For, our fundamental principle 
is, that the number of direct voters for any candidate must 
always be within the limits of probable personal acquaintance 
ship, both with the candidate and with each other, and of con 
veniently assembling in consultation. To accomplish this object, 
Precincts might be subdivided into wards ; but the voluntary 
and spontaneous division of the people themselves (within the 
Precinct) into Corporations as shown under that head, is much 
the better plan ; ajid any delegate-system, really such, would be 
more acceptable to the people in that way. But the considera 
tion of that way, must be deferred to its proper head. 

An obvious corollary from the foregoing principles, is, that 
woman-suffrage is so far an erroneous movement, lessening the 
probabilities of decreasing the size of Precincts to the proper and 
necessary smallness. 

3. Conditions of Locality. 

As to the extent of ground or territory to be embraced in a* 
Precinct, it should not be larger than would allow each man, or 
each voter, to travel by the usual methods, to and back from the 
place of meeting, conveniently in one day. In case the popula 
tion was too scattered for such a limit of territory, the theory 


then would be, that some merely temporary arrangement, anal 
ogous to the principle of United-States-territorial government, 
be made, until the population became sufficiently concentrated 
on such a tract, say of not more than about fifty miles diameter, 
the place of meeting being central, and not more than twenty- 
five miles from the circumference or boundary. 

As the essential idea of Precinct is neighborhood, both popu 
lation and locality must be small enough to admit of the usual 
feelings of real neighbors. Therefore the word neighbor, in 
common usage, as it contracts or expands for different localities, 
is an excellent definitive for the varying size of Precincts. 

If largeness of territory be offered as a reason why a state 
should be recognized as such, relying upon the hope of an in 
crease ; then that reason is equally as great, why it should not 
be so recognized, for it is so sparsely settled that the inhabitants 
live too far apart, and consequently are too little acquainted 
with each other. And if it is really going to increase so fast, it 
will not have long to wait. 

If it be said that the idea for the maximum size of the Pre 
cinct here presented, would not answer for the settlement of our 
new lands : we answer that our method of settling them has 
been too unscientific, and entirely too extravagant and diffuse. 
This we shall endeavor to prove at large in the article on land, 
under Property. It is the land-treatment that is wrong, not 
our Precinct system. Besides, even if modifications were neces 
sary in the wild woods, that would be no argument for them, 
where they were not necessary. 

In regard to boundaries, it is of course desirable that natural 
boundaries should be preferred, where they can be obtained ; 
by natural boundaries we mean Rivers, Creeks, &c., but in 
modern times and small Precincts, we can seldom have any 
thing better than roads or streets; fences or walls. But these 
latter can be made the best of all possible boundaries. At any 
rate, street boundaries are poor ones, because they call for double 
jurisdiction in the places most frequented ; and rivers do some 
what the, in thickly settled localities. 




1. Classification of Theories. 

The dispute about the relative rights of State and Nation, 
may be spun out almost indefinitely, by writers who have no 
scientific system wherein to place them ; according as they hold 
to one or another of various theories, which no one knows either 
the origin or the evidences of. These various theories of the 
fundamental relations between State and Nation, may be summed 
up into three classes, which are here presented as a convenient 
outline for meditation on the subject, and for the classification 
of all the arguments upon it; for the use of persons who may 
wish to pursue the subject in detail, further than we can spare 
time to do : Only remarking that ours, is what is here called 

(I. Theory). Supremacy of the Nation. States are Corpora 
tions with charters from the Nation alone. 

(1) (a) Either : Temporary, at the option of the Nation : 
(b) or : Perpetual. 

(2) (a) Either : With Definite limited charters : 

(6) or : With Indefinite charters altered by time and cir 

(II. Theory). Supremacy of the States. The Nation is a 
confederate Union : 

(1) (a) Either : Temporary, at the option of the States : 
(6) or: Perpetual. 

(2) (a) Either : With Definite and written charters : 

(6) or: With Indefinite charters altered by time and cir 

(III. Theory). Balances of State and Nation : Both as co 
existent in the people, as distinct Units : 

(1) (a) Either : Alterably : 
(6) or : Unalterably. 

(2) (a) Either : With Definite written charters : 



(6) or : With Indefinite charters altered by time and cir 

(3) (a) Both : For all Internal peace, order, and fraternity 
between Individuals and States, within the limitations of State- 

(6) And : For all External International relations, with 
out limitations of State-rights ! 

2. Limits of the special or collateral Arguments. 

In the foregoing article, THE GENERAL VIEW AND STATE 
MENTS of our theory, are really a general argument for it. 
Moreover, most of those statements contain special parts that 
are direct and formal arguments for various portions of the 
theory, as they pass along. Thus the historical statement con 
tained arguments, some drawn from the general course of his 
tory, some from the history of the United States. The scientific 
statements consist entirely of analogies which are arguments in 
substance. The comparisons with the constitution of the United 
States, presented the reasons for differing in a few places from 
that great and as yet unapproached political document. And 
the discussion of size was a direct argument for our system, be 
cause in this country where we are so familiar with the principle 
of state rights, and of independent sovereignty within limits, 
the question is more one of size than of any thing else. 

Furthermore, we will find some arguments when we come to 
the discussion of NATION, and determine its true location, and 
that it is not the sole unit, nor even the most active unit of 
political society ; and that it does not occupy any such a position 
of absolute power toward the Precincts, but what in the progress 
of history the power of Mankind over IT should be similar. 
Indeed, that position is almost drawn (in the Introduction itself) 
in the discussion of the Units, and their necessary balances. 

Many of our arguments for the Precinct are better considered 
under Corporation ; for while they apply equally to both, they 
are better considered under the latter ; because in the common 
theories, it is the more familiar organ, and still more, because 
the arguments are true in their own nature, entirely without 
respect to any ideas of locality. And for these arguments, the 
reader is referred to that Article. 

In arguments of this kind, it should always be borne in mind 


that the question is, not whether what one advocates is perfect, 
but whether it is better than what the opposing disputants ad 
vocate. The question is, not whether the government under 
small Precincts is infallible, but whether it is not better than a 
government of large states, or an entirely consolidated one. 

The neighborhood is the real germ of the state, and of its 
rights of government, both theoretically and historically. This 
proposition appeals to the human heart as well as to history. 
Hence, the burden of proof ought to be upon those who main 
tain the preference of large states as against small Precincts. 
This would be so, even if the doctrine of small Precincts were 
not essential to the sound general theory of government, and 
even if there were no particular arguments to show the supe 
riority of the rights and of the effects of the small Precincts : 
for it is in the Precinct or near neighborhood, that civil govern 
ment necessarily BEGINS, and will always spontaneously reor 
ganize after distractions or interruptions. But nevertheless, we 
will proceed with other arguments as we may be able. 


1 . Forms of the Continents. 

It is a remarkable fact observed by the great geographers, 
that progressive civilization has been almost entirely confined to 
the countries, the most indented by seas and oceans. Thus Eu 
rope has 6 1 miles of coast to each 1,000 square miles of conti 
nent, whilst Asia has only 2J. What is thereby gained, is not 
merely an increased extent of coast line facilitating commerce, 
but many abrupt and long peninsulas, which preserve the indi 
vidualities of tribes and districts. Thus Guyot (p. 46, " Earth 
and Man") says : of Europe : " Its principal mass is deeply cut 
in all parts by the ocean and by inland seas, and seems almost 
on the point of resolving itself into peninsulas. These penin 
sulas themselves, as Greece, Scandinavia, repeat to infinity the 
phenomena of articulation and indentation of coasts, which are 
characteristic of the entire continent. The inland seas and the 
portions of the ocean, its outer limits enclose, form nearly half 
of its surface. * * * Thus it is the continent most open to the 
sea for foreign connections, at the same time that it is the most 
individualized, and the richest in local and independent dis- 


tricts." It is true that Asia has extensive peninsulas ; the places 
of origin of the ancient civilizations, Arabia, the two Indies, 
Mandchouria and China. But the influence of these peninsulas 
was overcome by the immensity of the unbroken continent, to 
which they in comparison formed only small extremities. Thus 
Guyot (p. 46) says : "Asia is a mighty trunk, the numerous 
members of which, however, make only a fifth of its mass. In 
Europe, the members overrule the principal body, the branches 
cover the trunk," and (p. 45) : " The extent of this continent 
[Asia] is such, that, in spite of the depth of the indentations, 
there yet remains at its centre a greatly preponderating mass of 
undivided land, which commands the maritime regions, as the 
body commands the limbs." These all (p. 296) " are so many 
new Individuals, exciting each other reciprocally to animation." 
Moreover, other geographical conditions co-operate to make true 
Precincts. " The ground is everywhere cut and crossed by 
chains of mountains, moulded in a thousand fashions in such a 
way as to ,present, within the smallest possible space, the greatest 
number of districts physically independent." Again : " No con 
tinent is more fitted, by the multiplicity of the physical regions 
it presents, to bring into being and to raise up so many different 
nations and peoples." And (pp. 313-14) he says : " The assim 
ilation of the peoples of Europe, stops far short of confounding 
their distinctive qualities. Not long since the world saw them, 
* * * protesting against the complete fusion, seemingly about to 
annihilate their individual existence, and threatening to carry 
them back to the chaos of a homogeneous unity. * * * Each 
of the great physical districts composing that continent, in reality 
sustains a people whose moral and intellectual character, apti 
tude, talents, differ as much as their language, from those of 
their brethren. Each of these Nations plays, in the great drama 
of history, a special part in accordance with its particular gifts, 
and altogether, they form in truth and reality one of those rich 
organic unities, which we have recognized as being the natural 
result of all regular and healthy growth." Again, reasoning 
from the greater to the less, and observing that even the conti 
nents themselves are great -types of the uses of locality itself, 
however small, Guyot says (p. 323): " That the three continents 
of the North are organized for the development of man. * * * 


That each of these three continents, by virtue of its very struc 
ture and of its physical qualities, has a special function in the 
education of Mankind. * * * That the entire physical creation 
corresponds to the moral creation, and is only to be explained 
by it. * * * It is not perhaps without some surprise, that we 
behold privileged continents and races almost unalterably smit 
ten with a character of inferiority. And yet, why be surprised 
at this? Is it not the attribute of God to dispense His gifts t > 
whom He will, and as He will ? Do we not know that in every 
organism, there are needed divers members, clothed with func 
tions more or less exalted, but alike necessary ? We shall see 
that this great contrast of the historical continents, and the con 
tinents of the inferior races, seems established by Providence AS 


UNFOLD A NEW ACTIVITY. * * * For the law of contrasts in 
the order of nature, is the law of love in the moral order." 
2. Geographical course of Civilization. 

Again, Guyot (pp. 300-1) says: "The first glance we cast 
upon the annals of the Nations, enables us to perceive a singular 
but incontestable fact, that the civilizations representing the 
highest degree of culture ever attained by man, at the different 
periods of his history, do not succeed each other in the same 
places, but pass, from one country to another, from one conti 
nent to another, following a certain order. This order may be 
called the geographical order of history" (or of civilization). 
* * * " Tradition universally represents the earliest men de 
scending, it is true, from the high table-lands of Europe." "The 
traditions of the Chinese place the first progenitors of that people 
on the high table-land, whence the great rivers flow ; they make 
them advance, station by station, as far as the shores of the ocean. 
The people of the Brahmins come down from the regions of the 
Hindo-Khu and from Cashmere, into the plains of the Indus 
and the Ganges : Assyria and Bactriana receive their inhabitants 
from the table-lands of Armenia and Persia." 

Again, speaking of the ancient civilization of China, Hin- 
doostan, Syria, Arabia, Egypt and even Judea, Guyot says (pp. 
306-7) : " During the long centuries of these first ages, man 
has therefore learned but one thing, that he depends on the will 
of a master, but that master is an inexorable despot devoLl of 

166 BK - II- PRECINCT, ii. ir. 

love. He can only fear him ; -if he obeys him, it is as a slave ; 
he loves him not nor adores him, for love presuppose? lib 
erty. Men cannot remain thus. A cry of liberty makes itself 
heard; it re-echoes to the depths of that East which groans 
in its chains. In a small corner of the earth, neighboring still 
to the East, but admirably organized, in that small peninsula of - 
Greece, where all the varied contrasts of the whole continent 
seem to be repeated in a narrow space, under a climate blessed 
of Heaven, a new people arise, upon a new land, a free people, 
a people of brethren," (and we add, a people consisting of sev 
eral small and perpetually distinct tribes and Precincts.) " With 
them the period of youth commences; human consciousness 
awakes with energy ; man recovers himself. * * * Who can de 
scribe all there is of fresh and youthful energy, in that people 
of artists and philosophers, whose efforts open to us a world en 
tirely new? This is no longer the world of nature; it is that 
of the human soul. Everything, in fact, with the Greek, bears 
that eminently human character which betrays the preponder 
ance of human personality, and the energy of individual char 
acter. * * * The Greek no longer goes to the outer world of 
nature in search of wisdom, but descends to the depths of hu 
man consciousness. With Socrates and his school, philosophy 
has passed from the realm of nature into the realm of man ; she 
has become a moral philosophy. In the social life of the 
Greeks, no more * * * of those hard despotisms * * which by 
regulating human existence in detail, hinder its improvement ; 
but communities of free and equal men, and the predominance 
of democracy, of Individual and local life; these are its char 

All history and all experience corroborate these truths. But 
in order to apply them to present times, we must remember that 
those localities anciently contained but small populations com 
paratively, in their days of intellectual progress and develop 
ment; and that they prove our theory of the Precinct, as well as, 
or even more than they prove the necessity of nationality. The 
political cause of the downfall of the Greek democracies, was 
not their preservation of the rights of the Precinct, but their 
being without ANY adequate or permanent central government, 
whereby the nationality would be politically expressed. 


The experience of history is against the cultivation of nation 
ality, to the extent of the subversion of all local rights. The 
Romans allowed the natives of different Nations, to have their 
own laws in their various places of foreign residence. The 
recognition of a few Precinct-rights, has come down even in the 
modern laws of England, both in special local customs and in 
general powers, as in Isle of Man and of Jersey, and several 
other places. There are also specialties, not confined to one 
locality only ; as Burgage, Gavelkind, Copy-hold, and Villein- 
socage. These specialties relate chiefly to the titles of real 

Even the poor inhabitants of India, were as happy with their 
Precinct-system as their false religion would allow them to be, 
until England swallowed it up in a vast gulf of centralization, 
and sunk the people into poverty and dependence. (See Carey's 
Soc. Sci.) 

Small states, especially small free republics, are the best gov 
erned, both our own, and some foreign ones : as the Republic 
of San Marino, the Cantons of Switzerland, the small German 
free cities and states. Nor do we have to go from home to find 
examples; for our own small states are better governed, politic 
ally speaking, than the larger ones. Rhode Island, Connecti 
cut and Delaware, are much better governed than New York or 
Pennsylvania. And life is more respected in our small cities 
than in the large ones in the same neighborhoods. The colonies 
of the United States were substantially states at first, yet with 
but limited populations for many years; and they were the best 
governments of their age in the world, and were the germs of a 
great and we hope good future. Also, there are many late ex 
periments which prove the great moral uses of increasing the 
powers of small districts ; as for instance, Bethlehem, Oberlin, 
Vineland, also several large " communities." 


1. Variety in God's Creation. 

All that infatuation for absolute uniformity of religion, which 
used to prevail in the Middle Ages, seems concentrated, in the 
United States, into the one idea of producing sameness of polit 
ical organizations. And yet the story goes, a certain great bigot 

168 BK - H- PRECINCT. I}. III. 

could not make a few watches keep time alike. And whence 
indeed comes this insatiable desire among Americans (we call 
ourselves so), to force all political organizations into some one 
pet form, and under one central human power ; suppressing all 
variety, and blotting out all individual independent develop 
ment? It does not come from nature. Behold the infinite 
variety of creatures, both in the vegetable and animal worlds. 
Says Dr. Dick : " What an immense space in the scale of animal 
life, intervenes between an animalcule, which appears only the 
size of a visible point, when magnified five hundred thousand 
times, and a whale a hundred feet long and twenty broad ! The 
proportion of bulk between the one of these beings and the 
other, is nearly as thirty-four million million million to one. 
Yet all the intermediate space is filled up with animated beings 
of every form and order! A similar variety obtains in the 
vegetable kingdom. It has been calculated that some plants 
which grow on rose-leaves and other shrubs, are so small that 
it would require more than a thousand of them to equal in bulk 
a single plant of moss, and if we compare a stem of moss which 
is generally not above one-sixtieth of an inch, with some of the 
large trees in Guinea and Brazil of twenty feet diameter, we 
shall find the bulk of the one will exceed that of the other no 
less than about three million million times, which multiplied by 
1000 will produce three thousand million million, the number of 
times which the large tree exceeds the rose-leaf plant. Yet this 
immense interval is filled up with plants and trees of every 
form and size ! "With good reason then, may we adopt the lan 
guage of the inspired writers, ' How manifold are thy works, 

And we add; the same variety pervades the whole stellar uni 
verse, so far as telescope or Mathematics or light itself can reach. 
And yet, all vegetables, animals, stars and comets, in infinite 
variety, are working in one connected system of law, even in 
the control and government of the infinite God. And shall 
puny man present us one uniform system of political motion ? 
2. From Homogeneity to Heterogeneity. 

In Spencer's writings, a philosophical basis for our Precinct- 
theory, may be found in physical philosophy; and the proof 
also that it is perfectly consistent with the laws of universal 


nature, animate and inanimate; and furthermore, that as the 
Population and Power of a Nation increase as a whole, the 
power and independence of function, of the separate parts must 
increase also, and also the number of the subdivisions of the parts, 
(thus constituting a philosophical basis for our Precinct-theory, 
stated in universal terms). That these things are so, and that 
the violation of them must produce political disease, disorder, and 
finally national death, is quite accordant with the very scientific 
generalizations by Spencer (First Principles, 187) : as follows: 

" By the aggregate Solar System, as well as by each planet and 
satellite, progressive concentration has been and is still being 
exemplified. In each organism, that general incorporation of 
dispersed materials which causes growth, is accompanied by 
local incorporations, forming what we call organs. Every 
society, while it displays the aggregative process, by its increas 
ing mass of population, displays it also by the rise of dense 
masses in special parts of its area/ 7 [cities] : " And in all cases, 
along with these direct integrations, there go the indirect inte 
grations by which parts are made mutually dependent." [That 
is, Voluntary associations, Federations, Corporations, Societies, 
States and Provinces]. " From this primary re-distribution, we 
were led on to consider the secondary re-distributions, by inquir 
ing how there came to be a formation of parts" [i.e. Precincts] 
" during the formation of a whole. * * * It turned out that there 
is habitually a passage from homogeneity to heterogeneity, along 
with the passage from diffusion to concentration. While the 
matter composing the Solar System has been assuming a denser 
form, it has changed from unity to variety of distribution. 
Solidification of the Earth has been accompanied by a progress 
from comparative uniformity to extreme multiformity." 

" In the course of its advance from a germ to a mass of rela 
tively great bulk, every plant and animal also advances from 
simplicity to complexity. The increase of a society in numbers 
and consolidation, has for its concomitant an increased hetero 
geneity, both of its political and industrial organization. And 
the like holds of ALL super-organic products Language, Sci 
ence, Art and Literature. But we saw that these secondary 
distributions are not thus completely expressed. At the same 
time that the parts into which each whole is resolved, become 


more unlike one another, they also become more sharply marked 
off. * * * Further consideration made it apparent that the 
increasing definiteness which goes along with increasing hetero 
geneity, is not an independent trait; but, that it results from the 
integration which progresses in each of the differentiating parts, 
while it progresses in the whole they form. * * * As fast as 
there results variety in the sizes and forms of aggregates, and 
their relations to incident forces, there also results variety in their 
movements." And we add, unless these various new organs 
and new functions be allowed to develop naturally, diseases and 
disorders must follow. 

The Precinct-principle is the only principle whereby every 
separate function of society, may have its own new special and 
appropriate local organ. Its effect is just opposite to the na 
tional system ; for the national system presents all inducements 
to make all offices mere functions of the Nation itself as the one 
organ of governmental rule. Whereas the Precinct-principle 
makes that idea absolutely impossible ; and presents the idea 
of special organs for each special work, as the only manner in 
which such special work can be accomplished, at least beyond 
the Precinct. Then the alternative becomes either, special 
organ, or not special work, of which the practical result is only 
one organ for all functions, as in sponges and star-fish. 
3. Concentration versus Diffusion of Power. 

Centralization or concentration increases power at particular 
points. But diffusion of power increases the total amount of 
usable power as a whole, by liberating more and freer motion, 
and by increasing the spontaneous activity of all the parts, and, 
at the same time lessening the power lost partly in friction, and 
partly in the central cohesion. 

But these good results can only follow of course, after cen 
tralization procures and maintains general peace and general 
freedom; that is to say, whilst it prevents the Precincts from 
interfering with each other, or with the private rights of In 
dividuals, and preserves them from being interfered with by 
foreign Nations. 

This Precinct-system will give large power to a greater number 
of persons; and this dividing power, whilst at the same time 
stimulating to its faithful exercise, will also render a posthu- 


mous fame, of more relative activity and importance as a motive, 
because it will present a far larger number of vacancies for it. 
For, the great and good men of little states, are remembered as 
long as (and often loved more affectionately than) those of larger 

4. Sociological Experiment. 

The absolute necessity for Sociological experiment, in order to 
the improvement of society, has already been sufficiently spoken 
of, in the Summary Introduction. Therefore, the most that 
could be done here, is briefly to point ou,t that our Precinct sys 
tem affords one of the finest possible fields, and the very first 
practicable one, for the trial of such experiments. 

The Precinct-principle opens the way for true and voluntary 
sociological experiments. If one Precinct commits errors, it will 
soon suffer the natural consequences thereof, and others can avoid 
the error. If one discovers or invents or introduces any good, 
others can freely follow. 

In the case of Individuals finding themselves not in sym 
pathy with the Precinct wherein they reside, the fault may be, 
either in the Individual or in the neighborhood itself. The 
sympathies and feelings which are disturbed by the residence 
among them, of an Individual out of harmony, may be bad 
feelings or they may be good ones. It is presumption for others 
to pretend to judge in most cases. Who is to decide? The 
answer is, that as long as the resident is free and able to go to 
some Precinct where he will be in harmony, and to take his pos 
sessions or their value with him, in such case, no decision of the 
mind is needed to be made upon the subject as to who is right. 
Only let the Precinct enjoy its own liberty, without infringing 
the equal liberty of others. Only let it continue on its own plan 
awhile, and the fruits will evidence plainly who was wrong, 
the Individual or the Precinct. Small Precincts that are 
wrong will not long go on harmoniously. The smaller the 
Precinct, within reasonable limits, the sooner will the result 
manifest its moral quality. This manifestation however, will 
prove, not the correctness or incorrectness of any one of its prin 
ciples, but only of the net-resultant of the whole. These un 
derstood principles will soon work themselves fully into results, 
and show their true character. Only thus can the science of 


society become much improved. Neither good nor evil can be 
made plain to the minds of the people in general, otherwise 
than by allowing systems to work out into light, their own 
natural and true results. 

In general, with regard to all the domestic changes and im 
provements, recommended in this book on Social Science, or 
in any other book, or from any other source, it is possible to 
try them, better, by means of small Precincts than by any other 
method. And not only so, but it is the only method whereby 
true sociological experiments can be made, or whereby any so 
ciety can, either attain ideas any considerably advanced before its 
age, or prove such an advance even if it had attained it. Even 
most national and international questions would not be alto 
gether impossible of settlement by Precinct- trial, as many such 
questions can be solved as readily by distant Precincts of the 
same Nation, as by different Nations. 


1. In General. 

All laws may be divided into two sorts ; as they regard either 
the thing commanded to be done, or, the sanction to enforce it. 
The first sort of laws may be regarded as counsels of wisdom, 
the second, as punishments for the violation of those counsels. 
The first, are the primary and ultimate design, the second, are 
only incidental to the accomplishment of the others. A large 
part of human laws are only the re-enactments of the laws of 
nature and morality ; of such, the violation will always and 
ultimately be followed by their own natural and spiritual conse 
quences. Why then does the law of the land affix and add any 
arbitrary punishments? The answer is, that the natural and 
spiritual punishments are so often disbelieved, so seldom ap 
preciated, and often so long in coming, that they are entirely 
insufficient as safeguards of human society. 

Another lanre class of laws are not re-enactments of the laws 


of nature or morality, but only the settlement of points indif 
ferent in themselves, or not clearly limited in nature or moral 
ity; but yet necessary to be settled definitely in some manner, 
in order that all persons may know beforehand, how to regulate 
their affairs in regard to them. In these cases, the necessity of 


having arbitrary sanctions to the prescriptions of law, becomes 
all the more evident, but as yet those sanctions are hardly any 
more necessary than in the cases of the violations of natural and 
moral law. We say, as yet, for in proportion as humanity 
improves, if indeed it will improve sufficiently, the necessity 
of arbitrary sanction to natural law will become less and less 
urgent. For the more men see their true duties, and feel the 
obligations of them, and have faith in the certainty and impor 
tance of natural and spiritual consequences, the less will they 
stand in need of arbitrary ones. And this again, greatly favors 
the principle of self-government in Individuals, which by pro 
moting solid virtue, tends more and more to render government 
unnecessary. Thus and only thus, can the highest and best civil 
liberty be attained. The "forces" of arbitrary punishment, and 
of government by others, can only be generally disused, as Indi 
viduals become gradually more and more perfect in se/"-govern- 

The same principles evidently apply to Family-government, 
the type of and preparation for the state government. And 
here we must look for the great test and measure, of the varying 
needs of men for more or less natural strictness and arbitrariness 
of government, namely, whatever is found to be the decrease or 
increase of necessity for arbitrary Family-government, and what 
ever the degree or the lack, of the power of voluntary self-control 
in the Family, especially among the children; THAT will be 
found to be both a preparation for, and best measure of, the 
amount of fitness for their being entrusted with similar degrees 
of self-controlling power in the affairs of the world. In other 
words, it is only in proportion as men become fit for freedom 
individually, and in Family-relations, both as parents and chil 
dren, that they will become fit for release from law and force, 
in civil and political relations. 

Another idea in this connection is, that if laws must be uni 
form for all persons in the same Precinct, it follows that all its 
residents ought to be in nearly the same moral degree of self- 
control and moral civilization ; that is, should be substantially 
in moral homogeneity. Hence, in an old Nation with settled and 
fixed habits and general homogeneity, (which however can only 
be the case in a lower state of civilization,) it would not seem to 


matter so much, whether a government were a great consolida 
tion, or a union of small Precincts. But in proportion as moral 
civilization increases, the moral and intellectual differences in 
crease, and the necessity of Precinct-freedom increases, together 
with a greater degree of liberty for each to select the Precinct 
best fitted for him; and, each Precinct to select and invite the 
Individuals best suited to IT. 

The most effectual punishment that can be administered for 
most offences, is that which society administers spontaneously, 
through the loss of social standing among one's companions and 
associates. But this kind of punishment is greatly modified, 
and in many cases almost nullified, under the present condition of 
large territories. This nullification comes about in two ways. In 
one way, the citizens so frequently reside in a different territory 
from that in which they transact business, that they seem to 
have two lives and two representations, almost entirely distinct. 
The other way in which this nullification of social punishment 
is also brought about, is the facility with which offenders may 
remove from one territory to an adjoining one, and the certainty 
of finding? about the same assortment of social conditions, and 

O ' 

opportunities for companionship, that they had found in their 
former residence; so that the change is merely one of persons, 
but not of the kinds of persons. But if the Nations were con 
stituted into the very small Precincts which we propose, persons 
of similar moral dispositions would collect in Precincts together ; 
and offenders would often find it very difficult to find acceptance 
elsewhere, if they made themselves discreditable in their own 

2. Multitude and Minutiae of affairs. 

Another argument for the Precinct theory is ; there exist too 
many and too minute affairs needing the interference of law, to 
be entrusted to a large state or Nation. Governments ought to 
do so many things which yet it is obviously unjust to tax un 
willing or dissentient persons for, or compel such to co-operate 
with or conform to, and furthermore, there are so many differ 
ent views of rights, that the difficulties can only be obviated by 
encouraging people of similar views to reside and do business 
in the same neighborhoods, and thereby, in conformity to their 
own rules. The following are some of the subjects which belong. 



more especially to the Precinct, either because of its inherent 
right over them, or because of the uncertainty of their being 
proper objects for government interference at all : Rights of 
Conscience, including religion and church, Rights to Alcoholic 
Liquors and to Luxuries, Right and duty of Governmental 
Education, Right and duty of Governmental maintenance of 
the poor, the care of the sick and infirm, Questions of Health 
not aifecting localities or Individuals beyond the Precinct, 
Right of Marriage and Divorce including aid to widows and 
needy children, Right of Women to avocations, to property, 
and claims to suffrage, Age of Suffrage, Right of Individuals 
to ignore Government when aggrieved, Questions resulting 
from War, such as Drafting into compulsory service and com 
pelling to pay war taxes, Control of Farming Lands, Minfes 
and Mining operations, Streets and Roads within the Precinct, 
Manufacturers and Retail Trade, Paper Currency. 

Many persons will doubt the legitimacy of some of these 
rights being given to the Precincts, but even omitting the 
subjects of currency and divorce, and perhaps of ignoring the 
state, enough other matters have been mentioned above, too 
minute and too multitudinous in their nature, to be accom 
plished by national power or under national laws. 

In general we may say that many things, from their local 
nature, should require the agreement especially and only of the 
neighborhoods, townships, &c., that are directly interested. 
And mostly, the interference of one locality with another, should 
be in proportion to their geographical and other nearnesses. 
Therefore this question depends on the size of the Precinct ; the 
degree of right interference being in inverse proportion to the 
size of the Precincts. But the difference of their interferences, 
is to be more as to the smallness of the specialty or matter, than 
in the principles to which it relates. 

The duties and consequent rights of a Precinct are what were 
chiefly in Comte's mind, in the structure of his theory of govern 
ment. And it accordingly exhibits the fact of its origin from 
the little plan of St. Simon (or Fourier) applied to a French 
or other vast empire, comprehending minutiae of regulation, and 
details, that cannot be either justly or successfully applied to or 
by a large consolidated government, especially to or by sinful or 


even imperfect beings, as men are. Plato and some other manu 
facturers of ideal governments, have made a similar confusion 
of the rights of the different units. And Mulford and the other 
centralizers are following in their wake. 

3. Competition in Government. 

Then again, the numerousness of these little Precincts would 
introduce the principle of competition among governments, as a 
practical motive, for daily use. Viewing large Nations, we can 
find no such competition for citizens, at all worth mentioning: 
except that between Nation and Nation, as the United States 
against Germany or Great Britain. And in the United States 
we cannot find any traces of a competition of this kind worth 
mentioning, except in the very new States competing for settlers, 
or in the cities competing for this or that particular kind of 
trade or honor. There is but little governmental competition 
among us except for short-sighted or immediate results. 

Now, if any could introduce this principle into operation 
among and between some thousands of adjoining townships, 
villages and Precincts, we can scarcely doubt that its effects 
would be equally as good as they are among private individuals. 
Of course we do not mean to exalt competition as a very good 
thing in itself; we fondly hope for and look forward to the day 
when it will be greatly superseded by co-operation. But so long 
as competition is needed among the mass of Mankind, individu 
ally, so long and for that very reason, it will be needed among 
Precincts and localities. Even if it were possible for communes 
to exist, from which the principle of competition would be 
effectually shut out, still there would remain a necessity to have 
competition between different communes. For competition is 
necessary somewhere in everything, during the present incom 
plete civilization. And the monopolizing and repressing spirit 
and policy, are just as bad in government as they were in trade 
and manufactures. 


1. In General. 

Smallness of territory produces mutual knowledge of each 
other, as well as mutual good feeling, so that government is 
more practicable, and happiness more complete ; the people being 


agreed in their general opinions. Smallness of Precincts also 
makes a direct vote by the people more practicable : the larger 
the district or population, the less direct can the representation 
be. Thus, the people have both a better opportunity to know 
their representatives and officers personally, and also a better 
opportunity to express their own views and intentions. Such 
are the schemes and cliques constantly forming to deceive the 
people, both in trade and politics, that ordinary citizens cannot 
possibly know them before they are accomplished ; and hence 
necessarily have to depend on the characters of the leaders, and 
therefore should know their characters well. 
2. Corruption. 

The notorious and general selfishness, partisanship and cor 
ruption of officials, whether in political, or fashion-making, or 
social governments, drive men to the resort of having small dis 
tricts with a maximum of self-regulating power, that thus there 
may exist the plainest and most direct responsibility to the 
people, and the least amount of government by absentees and 
strangers. Thus all the motives of Social Circle and personal 
acquaintanceship, will be added to the ordinary motives, in order 
to induce official faithfulness. 

Small Precincts, making up the whole Nation as we propose, 
by the greatness of their number, and by the smallness of the 
amount of revenue they could afford to waste, as well as by the 
check which would constantly be held over their officers, by the 
mere fact that their doings were observed in particulars, by all 
their constituents, would afford the best possible political checks 
against the success of all attempts at corrupting the legislative 
bodies, as well as against the value or amounts that would or 
could be obtained by success and skill in bribing. 
3. Specialties. 

We are all the time having special acts of superior Legisla 
tures, now for some county, now for some town, giving control, 
now over temperance, now over its plan of voting, now over 
this thing, now over that. But special legislation has been one 
of our greatest curses, whether in regard to corporations, coun 
ties or towns. Perhaps it is not generally known among the 
people, that nearly one fourth of the counties and Precincts in 
the State of Pennsylvania, have had granted to them special 



privileges, or, been put under special restrictions ; one thing to 
one, and another to another, not applied to any of the other Pre 
cincts. The Speaker of the Pennsylvania Senate, in his Inau 
gural, Jany. 1871, says : " Special legislation has become the vice 
of our system. The prevalence of a general rule of law over 
our whole territory, upon subjects usually within the scope of 
legislative action, is now the EXCEPTION, and special enact 
ments and special privileges are found upon almost every page 
of our voluminous annual statute book." Let us have no more 
need thus to extend human rights drop by drop. Give every 
Precinct its local rights in ALL respects, without any more 
specialism. For the true Precinct-theory is the first step into a 
truly GENERAL legislation. 

Some moral or literary qualifications might be highly useful 
in cities, to counteract the influence of mobs; and also especially 
because cities are in advance of the country in some other kinds 
of culture, so also it would seem ought they to be in advance in 
the culture and qualifications required for political franchises. 
At any rate, it would be well to allow such Precincts (within a 
city), as chose, to try some such qualifications, and see how they 
would compete with those that refused any such revised qual 
ifications. This, however, is to be understood, only after the 
general Introduction of the Precinct-system. 

Our Precinct-theory contains the only method whereby, under 
the tenure of land by the public, as advocated by Spencer (and 
the present writer), the tenants can be induced to improve, with 
permanent buildings, as thoroughly as under the private owner 
ship tenure, or so very nearly as to answer present purposes. 
This can be accomplished by allowing the tenant to erect what 
ever permanent buildings, mainly of brick, stone or iron, he 
chooses, subject to general rules of common sense and expe 
diency, under the sanction of officers for the judgment of the 
case ; and then the public giving the tenant a mortgage for the 
amount, to run various lengths of time, from 50 to 100 years, 
according to the nature of the case. Absolute proofs of the 
actual cost, would be required. But where is the governing 
power that could now be safely trusted with such judgments ? 
We may answer, nowhere but in small districts of an honorable, 
moral, and well-cultivated people. 



1. In General. 

Government and civilization are only valuable as they pro 
mote human happiness. Human happiness depends more on 
the multitude of little things of daily life, than on the occa 
sional great events. And connected with this also, human hap 
piness rests largely on closeness of sympathy, sameness of view, 
tenderness of feeling, with those with whom we are most fre 
quently in contact. The most ultra liberty, in association with 
a people with whom we were not in sympathy, would be lone 
liness and desolation. A solitary man is not so lonely in an 
uninhabited wilderness, as is a stranger in a strange city, not 
even speaking the language of the people. 

There can scarcely be a question, that small isolated Christian 
populations are the happiest, and morally the best. The Pit- 
cairn-Islanders, the Republic of San Marino, the Welsh, the 
Scotch, the Irish, and the voluntary associations of religious 
communities in America in modern times, and the rush into 
religious communities in the early ages, all co-operate to prove 
this idea. 

The Pitcairn-Islanders, are a splendid proof of the utility of 
the independence and isolation of Precincts, so also are the few 
cases of successful civilization of the North American Indians, 
only made successful by isolating their Precincts. And partly 
in the same manner perhaps, may be explained the unexpected 
virtue and happiness of the Mormons in Utah, and of some of 
the free communists. " Evil communications corrupt" the best 
manners ; and even vice, in isolation, loses much of its power. 

The fact in nature and providence, that men are involved in 
the sufferings and partake of the joys and honors of their own 
Nation, and their own Precinct, proves, that Nature intends, that 
men should depart from localities whose sentiments or principles 
they radically dissent from, and should seek other localities 
whose principles they approve of, and thus become justly entitled 
to and affectionately participant in, the sufferings and the joys of 
their localities, whether Nation or Precinct. But still, the obli 
gations and natural " indications" for removal from Precinct to 
Precinct, are much stronger than for removal from Nation to 


Xation, because the removal from Precinct to Precinct is com 
paratively so very much easier than the other. 

As Comte has done much to show how great respect a govern 
ment ought to pay to its thinkers, and why and how it ought to 
take care of them ; so Spencer has done much to show the unal 
terable nature and inviolability of Individual liberty, as against 
majorities, equally as truly as against aristocracies. But when 
it comes to the application of their own principles, neither of 
those writers seems to have hit upon the happiest method. We 
have now however, only to do with their theories so far as 
they relate to Precinct-rights and order. And there is no method 
for securing the independence, happiness and rewards of good 
thinkers, so successful as the Precinct-system. 
2. Individual Liberty. 

The fullest possible allowance for Individual rights and free 
dom, as far as is consistent with other men's equal freedom, can 
only be attained, either in a state of isolation from society, which 
is the road to barbarism, or else in such a variety of Precincts, 
as will allow each Individual to find some one or more persons 
sufficiently near his own ideas, as to justify being regarded so for 
the usual practical purposes of life. And this variety is possible, 
only by making the Precincts very small, so that they shall be 
numerous, and the variety, brought within convenient or accessi 
ble distances. And the great " emancipation" question among 
all highly civilized peoples, is the question relative to the 
Emancipation of the Precinct. 

The Precinct-system is the best method whereby to enable 
men as Individuals, to avoid "government control," (as Spencer 
demands, meaning of course, national controt) Instead of lib 
erty to " ignore the state," we would have liberty to change 
one's Precinct residence. Spencer, it is true, not thinking of 
the Precinct-theory, carries his idea of " ignoring the state" to 
an extreme, when lie describes this right as "the attitude of a 
citizen in a condition of voluntary outlawry." But remember, 
Spencer was thinking only of outlawry from the Nation. And 
Mulford's reply (p. 274) to Spencer is not sound. Thus his 
reply says : " If then * * * Mr. Spencer assert and exercise his 
rights, and while maintaining his right to ignore the state, is 
robbed by some vagrant, of course he cannot recover through 


the aid of the government, the property which he has lost; or 
the vagrant, not. having determined himself to ignore the state, 
may bring the power of the government, being the agency in his 
employ, to secure him in his actual possession, IT of course re 
fusing to admit the claim of one who had ignored the state." 
Now this reply to Spencer is not sound ; first, because it does 
not follow that a state must of course "refuse to admit" a 
person's claims, merely because it was not bound IN DUTY to 
recognize them ; but second and chiefly, because the vagrant is 
by the supposition, under the state and bound to obey its laws, 
and therefore has no right to rob or murder anybody. The fact 
is that Mr. Spencer's idea simply is, that the person who ignores 
the state is in the relative condition to the state, somewhat simi 
lar to what a foreigner was held by ancient national law, and is 
still held by barbarians, namely, at their government's mercy : 
but it does not follow as Mulford has it, that such person is at 
the individual mercy of any one who chooses to maltreat him. 
Both these writers are possessed by Nationality ; the one feels 
the tyrant's goad and would tear its heart out, the other is 
pleased, and "licks the rod." We conclude, Mr. Spencer is 
right in the principle at bottom, although not to the unlimited 
extent he argues ; and that, only a system of Precincts can be 
trusted to carry it out. 


Personal attractions have strength like the chemical forces, so 
also have home and locality ; whereas, the artificial states or dis 
tricts, and even the Nation itself, have comparatively only the 
strength of gravitation. Thus it is, that Social Circle and Pre 
cinct have, in actual life the strongest power on man naturally, 
and the first government claims upon him that he voluntarily 
yields to. 

Human nature itself makes more account of Precinct than it 
does of Nation. There may be one man in ten thousand, or 
even one in one thousand, who in a time of great excitement, 
may be willing to give his property or even his life, for his 
Nation. But there can be found nearly everywhere, and in 
ordinary times without extraordinary excitement, one man in a 
hundred, perhaps one in ten, who may be willing, according to 


his means, to deny himself dollars, more or fewer, for the benefit 
of his own immediate neighborhood, and even to risk his life for 
it if necessary. And even in great sacrifices for national patriot 
ism, the motive at bottom often is to please one's friends, neigh 
borhood and Social Circle. 

Again, we find that the riotous and disorderly, do in fact and 
naturally congregate and reside together in small localities, in 
which they would not allow orderly citizens to reside in peace ; 
we find also that the outcasts and criminals have their localities, 
through which it is not only repulsive but dangerous for respect 
able, or even respectably dressed persons to pass alone. Why, 
then, should not quiet and orderly citizens be encouraged or 
allowed to form into localities of their own, and to exclude 
others from settlement there, and from all unnecessary in 
trusion? or are vice and disorder to be allowed always and 
everywhere, systematically to enjoy privileges ever denied to the 
virtuous and orderly ? 

It is a general doctrine of Swedenborg, a philosopher of rare 
insight, that it is the universal Law of Heaven and Hell and 
Eternity, that men should continually be striving to find their 
exact sympathizers, and will ultimately arrange themselves in 
groups and societies, exactly according to the genera and species 
of their moral and intellectual characters. And the idea seems 
both natural and philosophical. From which it would seem a 
proper inference, that the same tendency is justifiable in, and 
should be amply provided for, by the laws and arrangements of 
earthly society. And this exactly confirms our Precinct-theory. 


1. In General. 

The Precinct-principle is further proved, by its consistency 
with the Saviour's maxim to " love thy neighbor as thyself." 
The interpretation which some put on the word neighbor, mak 
ing it mean all Mankind, is mere jugglery ; for it takes away all 
the meaning of the word " neighbor", and therefore takes away 
the " point" of the passage. No doubt the ultimate object of 
Christianity is, and the result will in a perfect state be, to make 
all Mankind love each other as themselves ; but it is hardly fair 
to force that interpretation on to every passage in the Bible, nor 


even upon every passage which says love. The truth of the pas 
sage is this, namely, that loving the neighbor as one's self is the 
place where this universal love begins, so that if perfect there, it 
will gradually work outward through circle after circle, unto all 
Mankind. The fact is that this passage is very sociological, for, 
being requested to explain it, the Saviour gave the parable of 
the good Samaritan, tjie exact point of which is, that persons 
living in one Precinct, when traveling in the adjoining one, are 
bound to fulfill the duties of charity in distress, even although 
the adjoining Precincts be religious enemies to each other. It 
seems to be diametrically opposed to burning heretics, at least 
when they live in the next Precinct. If you may perhaps burn 
them out, you must not go out to burn them. 

Another very proper interpretation of our Saviour's maxim 
of loving the neighbor, is, that duties are to be performed to the 
persons whom we actually meet, and especially whom circum 
stances make needy, rather than that we should be filled with 
sentimentality, and go hunting over all creation for opportuni 
ties to do good. Now, this inward doctrine, when it takes an 
outward form, seeks to take some form of the social structure, 
and that form is emphatically the Precinct. It would be almost 
impossible, otherwise, for men generally to know what to do, or 
where to do it. 

It is rather a happy accident, if accident it be, that our " con 
stitutional" word designating Precinct, namely, the word com- 
mon-wealth, should be so very expressive of communism. One 
cannot escape the feeling that this is a prophetical anticipation 
in language, that the Precinct is the especial container and polit 
ical form of communism. The old Roman word republic meant 
public affairs, not common-wealth. 

2. Unity of Local Enterprises. 

The system of small Precincts affords opportunity for re 
ligious unity, and success in benevolent enterprises ; and thereby 
can be realized the great and truly Christian idea, that all the 
Christians of a place are the church of that place. And so long 
as men differ widely on doctrines, and on the degrees of their 
importance, this desirable result cannot be realized to any con 
siderable extent in any other way. 

The plan of having all the Christians of a place organized as 


the church of that place, gives rise to the practicability of placing 
all the benevolent operations in one Precinct, under one arrange 
ment of visitations and management ; the advantage of which is 
well known to all engaged in benevolent enterprises, both in pre 
venting deception, and in promoting virtue, and counteracting 
vice and crime. 

Perhaps it may not be desirable that each Precinct should be 
made up entirely of one religious persuasion at present, nor until 
the coming times when Mankind have become so fit, and intel 
ligence been so disseminated, as to prevent the dangers. Yet 
even now we find that many do get into Precincts consisting 
almost exclusively of their own religion or class. As the Cath 
olics settle among their churches, also the Quakers, the Chinese 
and the colored persons; whilst the aristocracies also get by 
themselves in their own neighborhoods, to a considerable extent. 

Mr. Ruskin has drawn a beautiful picture of the duties of a 
state, and especially of its " moral overseers." But it is evi 
dently a picture that is only practicable as yet, by and in such 
Precincts as would adopt it, such Precincts being so small that 
all persons who " loved darkness rather than light" could readily 
move to the places of their choice; or possibly it might be 
adopted by general corporations like any of the various Associa 
tions. In "Time and Tide," p. 80, he says: "Putting how 
ever, all questions of forms and names aside, the thing actually 
needing to be done is this, that over every hundred (or some 
not much greater number) of the Families composing a Christian 
State, there should be appointed an overseer or bishop, to render 
account to the State, of the life of every Individual in those 
Families, and to have care both of their interest and conduct, to 
such an extent as they may be willing to admit, or as their 
faults may justify, so that it may be impossible for any pers n, 
however humble, to suffer from unknown want, or live in i n- 
recognized crime, such help and observance being rendered 
without officiousness, either of interference or inquisition (the 
limits of both being determined by law) but with the patient 
and gentle watchfulness which true Christian pastors now exer 
cise over their flocks." 

As a remedy for and a prevention of the vice and degrada 
tion of cities, some regular plan of visitation might be very efii- 


cient. The great difficulty to be overcome, is the difficulty of 
getting the voluntary moral and religious forces of society to 
combine, for such a purpose, into one harmonious organization. 
But the good of these plans can never be obtained permanently, 
only when there is but one religious and benevolent organiza 
tion for the same objects in one given locality, which in fact is 
the beginning of either our Precinct or our Corporation system. 

One of the arguments for our theory is to be found in the 
difficulties attending the matter of the Bible and religion in the 
public schools, or indeed in schools at all, whether public or pri 
vate. This whole question we will endeavor to examine when 
we come to Education and Public Schools, under the head of 
the Intellectual element of Social Science, only remarking now, 
that any religion or non-religion whether Chinese or whatever, 
which asks for its own schools or school-fund, in countries where 
it has not the rule, ought to be able to show that it grants sepa 
rate public schools or school-funds in countries where it has the 
rule. But if they cannot do that, why still let us give them 
their rights here, and trust to the good effects of justice and to 
other means, to correct what seem to us their errors. Provided 
however, that no denomination should receive as its share, more 
than it contributes to the general fund for the same purpose. 
3. Persecution. 

The Precinct principle explains the political rights of small 
minorities, for instance the Mormons ; and so long as social 
distinctions press hard upon women as a sex, so long will any 
tribe be politically justifiable which will improve the condition 
of woman. And this explains the moral but temporary justifica 
tion of " Mormondom." Their political success is explained by 
the inalienable right and indestructible power of the Units, and 
in particular of the Precinct-unit. As Dixon says, we with 
our tremendous majority and ample appliances, revenues, preach 
ers and so on, ought to be willing to use and to rely upon moral 
and religious influence alone, to convert or reform the Mor 
mons; only demanding freedom for our moral influences to 
operate there, and for their people to admit those influences. But 
more probably, we ought not to demand anything more, than free 
dom for all Mormons who desired to, to return to the other parts 
of the United States, at the expense of the Mormon Precinct. 


Calvin burning Servetus in the little Precinct of Geneva, or 
the New England Puritans hanging Quakers in the little colony 
of Boston, are very different things, from the king the emperor 
or the republic, trying to extirpate heresy throughout all their 
dominions. The spirit in the heart of the rulers may be the 
same, but the spirit of the people that upholds it is very dif 
ferent ; and so . also are the sociological principles involved. 
And what, during the Reformation, saved Germany and Swit 
zerland so quickly, from long dissensions such as disturbed 
France and the British Isles, were their independent Precinct 

Here we must offer an argument which may perhaps not be 
popular, but its weight of importance presses it on us. It has 
always appeared to the writer, that the old Catholic argument 
for persecution of dissenters, has never been fairly answered. 
The same argument is used by Mahometans, and even by some 
evangelical Protestants. They argue thus, the salvation of the 
soul is more important than that of the body, yet nearly all ad 
mit, it is justifiable to defend our bodies with mortal weapons, 
and to put murderers to death, much more therefore would it 
be justifiable to put heretics and infidels to death, whose doc 
trines are supposed to kill, not the body only, but the immortal 
soul. To this argument, it is no answer to affirm dogmatically 
that religion is a province beyond the control of human law, for 
that is the very point in question. Nor is that argument ever 
practically regarded, when any one religion becomes tremen 
dously in excess of all opposing ones, for instance, in the case of 
the United States against the Mormons. 

But there is a ground upon which this argument for persecu 
tion may be thoroughly avoided, namely, by the rights of the 
Precinct. Let all who work in religion or morality, to cultivate 
practices utterly at variance with the fundamental determination 
of their neighbors, remove to localities by themselves, where the 
other citizens may feel that their children and Families are safe 
from the contaminations of what they conceive to be soul-damn 
ing doctrines. This doctrine of Precincts would have saved the 
early Christians from persecution by the Jews. Our Saviour 
commanded his disciples, saying, " When they persecute you in 
one city flee ye to another/ 7 This principle carried out would 


have ultimately driven those Christians into localities by them 
selves, where, by their works they could have proven to the 
civil governments, that they were not evil-doers ; and, what is 
more to the argument, where Rome would have allowed them 
their own "cultus," according to her established rules; and when 
once the recognition of such a " cultus " had been made by law, 
the time would have soon arrived when the Christians would 
have been allowed to found their own local Corporations any 
where throughout the Roman Empire, mingling with the com 
mon citizens in the day, and retiring to their own localities at 
night, according to the Roman laws, but all the while deciding 
disputes between themselves by their own rules. , 

We have seen something like this, when the persecuted Mora 
vian puritans fled to the estates of Zinzendorf and were there 

4. Scripture- Type, in the Hebrew Nation. 

Here may be placed an argument from the Scriptures, the 
divinely authorized example of the Hebrew Nation instituted 
by the special authority and care of God. The Hebrew Nation 
was divided into tribes, and great care was commanded to be 
taken to preserve their distinctness. This authorized example 
combines with the type-theory, as elaborated in the Summary 
Introduction and other parts of the work, and should (it seems) 
be admitted as a precedent. Mulford very properly claims the 
authority of the Hebrew precedent for the divine authority of 
the Nation, but it is equally as quotable for the divine authority 
of the Precinct. Some objections that might seem valid against 
this argument will be treated of under the head of " Special 
Objections Answered/' at the conclusion of this the second PART 
of Precinct. (See Chap. X.) 


1. In General. 

Resemblance and sympathy form the chief elements of the 
Family circle. And in primitive states of society, the same 
similarity of views feelings and interests, in a degree also, takes 
place in a whole tribe. 

But when we come to a mixed people, one mixed with immi 
grants from various countries, of persons of various races and 

188 BK - n. PRECINCT, ii. ix. 

of the most opposite views of religion and morals, there remains 
but one possible method of completely applying the tribe-prin 
ciple to the case. And be it remembered, the tribe is a natural 
unit of society ; the principle therefore upon which it is founded, 
must always exist, and be made fundamental in the constitutions 
of government. The only way then, of applying the tribe- 
principle, is, by allowing each Individual to select his own tribe; 
and each tribe to fix its rules, and to say whom it will receive 
and whom not. There must be a plain agreement, either ex 
pressed or implied, between Individuals and Precincts, that both 
parties are in the main satisfied with each other. 

In modern times, the fundamental unit of the tribe-principle, 
finds its own first development in material things. We find 
men, in all the various classes 01* society, subdividing them 
selves spontaneously into social and political and business cir 
cles. But until government can understand and embrace this 
principle, and legally recognize the tribe-element, it must neces 
sarily be a failure, for it ignores one of the essential elements 
and one of the essential conditions, of the organization of so 
ciety. Here then, two alternatives present themselves. First, 
an effort to organize the religious, moral, social and political 
circles, into the tribe-unit or tribe-element, by constituting them 
with the general powers of government. That this is positively 
practicable, and so far desirable as a subsidiary aid, may perhaps 
be shown under the head of Corporation. But the main alter 
native evidently is the second one, namely, regarding the Pre 
cinct-division as the unit or holder of the common government- 
powers. For no voluntary circle, unless it occupies its own 
territory for itself, can completely answer to the idea of a tribe. 
The aim of government, here, is to make both principles unite 
into one, to make each Precinct become the voluntary union of 
the same circle, or of tw T o or more harmonious circles. 
2. Relations to Social Circle. 

Laws are necessarily unjust which do not acknowledge and pro 
vide for existing facts, and existing grades in society, which are 
as distinct as different religions, or different Nations. And among 
the facts thus necessary to meet and provide for, one is the Social 
Circle. So great is its importance that we have classified it as one 
of the Units or fundamental analytical elements of human society. 


The very origin of Tribe was historically a Social Circle, 
some particular set of friends voluntarily associating with each 
other in preference to others. And as our theory takes the tribe 
to be the origin of the Precinct, it follows from the theory, that 
the idea of Social Circle is inherent in that of tribe. And when 
tribe becomes Precinct, it equally follows from our theory, that 
the idea of sociability and Social Circle, must be an eternally 
essential idea of the Precinct, not necessarily of every Precinct 
in particular, but of the idea in general, and of some in par 

Reverting again to historical origins, the tribe would not 
continue always to be of one Social Circle only. Differences 
would arise gradually within the Precinct itself, from various 
causes; and then occasionally other persons would join with it 
from other Precincts, whose occupation made it mutually agree 
able or mutually advantageous to do so. The instincts of Man 
kind often produce the co-existence and very near residence in 
the same Precinct, of the very richest and the very poorest, 
because such are essential to each other constantly. Whilst the 
middle classes seek neighborhoods by themselves, despising those 
who are below them in the Social Circle, as much as they envy 
those who are above them in the same artificial distinctions. 

Hence it is possible for more than one Social Circle to exist in 
one Precinct ; but not for more than one social set to have the 
government thereof: nevertheless an equal arbitration between 
all, is possible. But in the matter of the rule of a Precinct, 
nothing is more certain than that the rule generally falls to the 
control of one Social Circle ; and not only so, but also into the 
control' of some one set or clique of that Social Circle. The 
instincts of men are constantly exhibiting this tendency. The 
aristocracy will seek one neighborhood; the respectable orderly 
working people, another ; the rowdies, another. Let the fighters 
get together and fight one another; this is the providential 
arrangement for the self-cure of these evils. But let good and 
orderly citizens, have the control in their own localities. 

Tt is not for a moment supposed that Precincts are to consist 
of persons necessarily all in the same social equality, but only, 
that they should be in a state of mind whereby they would have 
the same views of the rights and duties flowing from social dis- 


tinctions, if any. Neither, that they should all be employees or 
all employers; but only that their ideas should be in harmony as 
to the mutual rights and duties of employees, no more than that 
they should all be either males or females, but that they should 
have the same opinions and feelings and habits, as to the relative 
duties of Family-life. Thus it is that the question of equal free 
dom without disturbing the rights of others, becomes practically, 
the equal freedom without disturbing what others have learned 
to be their rights, or what they have become fitted to enjoy, up to 
that time. Hence, perfect freedom for the Individual, in society, in 
practice really means a perfect or indefinite variety of small and 
near Precincts, each Precinct in itself as far independent, as is 
consistent with the important utilities and rights of the others. 
3. Relations to Races, Species, and Breeds. 

By our Precinct principle, it becomes possible for different 
races to be in separate Precincts, as indeed they are in duty 
bound to continue, unless they can live amicably and usefully 
together. And where they can thus live amicably, they also 
can form Precincts of mutual service, and thus exhibit one of 
the Creator's designs in ordaining different races of men, as well 
as different races of animals or vegetables. It would of course 
be found, that the higher the development of reason in the 
superior race, and also the better and higher the moral develop 
ments in both races, the more amicably and easily they could 
live together, and the more they would voluntarily organize 
together. Whereas, the lovers of fine arts and amusements, of 
war, and of ignorance, would naturally be found repelling each 
other, and forming Precincts each of their own kind. Thus the 
great problem of different races co-existing in one Nation, which 
is looming up with very unsatisfactory proportions in the United 
States, might be easily settled. Europeans, Catholics, Protest 
ants, African descendants, Chinese, and Indians, need give no 
further theoretical or scientific uneasiness. 

The principle is, that these opposites will voluntarily seek each 
other for mutual good, as soon as they are fit to live together in 
peace and charity ; and will consent to arrange themselves so that 
neither can domineer over the other. But until that time comes, 
they may either, one be in submission to the other, or else each 
seek its own separate neighborly locality voluntarily. 


Small Precincts are required by the Moral and Physical Ad 
vantages, of marriages between persons of blood and race not 
far distant. Modern researches tend to prove that bodily health 
also, is best promoted by inter-marriages of persons not much 
further removed from each other, than sufficient to keep clear 
from the dangers of marriage within close or traceable degrees 
of kindred. Amalgamations between races very different, as 
between the whites and blacks in this country, and as between 
the English and the Hindoos in India, are said by the Physiolo 
gists, almost always to become barren in the third or fourth >"' 
generation, and to end the race. 

Mankind, when removed to climates very different from their 
natural ones, become enfeebled in health, and decrease in fruitful- 
ness. But Jews, Gipsies and some others, seem to be less subject 
to these influences, apparently because of possessing better consti 
tutions ; and this superiority may be owing to their being close 
tribes, and answering our theory here in regard to neighborly 
marriages. It is admitted that marriages between races of close 
resemblance, have been {Productive of some benefits. 

The superiority of the English in many respects, is attributed 
to the fact of that Nation being a compound of the blood of A 
several Nations who in ancient times occupied the Island, and 
who yet contribute some of their still separated elements from 
Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, and from the isolated retired ham 
lets of England itself. And the rapid progress of our country 
in so many respects, is attributed by many, to similar causes, 
namely, our great intermingling of the blood, not only of the 
original British tribes, but also of the various German tribes, 
with a little tincture from almost every Nation in Europe. Yet 
neither the mingled English nor the Americans are so healthy 
as the separate tribes, either morally or physically. 

These facts would tend to show, that whilst the intellectual 
and material progress may be the results of unions of varieties 
that far distinct ; yet that moral progress, and especially phys 
ical health, are deteriorated thereby. And this deterioration of 
health has become such an alarming phenomenon in this coun 
try, that any general principle for its improvement should receive 
every possible encouragement. 

Among Mankind, as among " other animals," it is necessary 


from time to time to raise new and improved breeds. And dis 
tinction and separate development of Precincts, is one method, 
and the very best one, to accomplish this end. In improving 
the blood of human beings, we cannot of course expect to pro 
ceed as with animals, in disregard of the moral conditions and 
moral feelings; because these are the most important parts of 
human nature. And it is in order to improve these, quite as 
much as or more than, to improve any intellectual or physical 
characteristics, that it is desirable to produce improved stocks of 
human beings at all. And of course, the idea of attempting to 
produce this kind of improvement, in a formal, outward or pre 
scribed way, is inhuman. But the natural and instinctive oper 
ations of our Precinct system, would spontaneously produce some 
of the most radical improvements of this kind, that could bo 
desired; and that too, by the marriages of persons sufficiently 
near alike, who being located near together would spontaneously 
and instinctively select each other, better usually than formal 
science could advise. 


1. Intermingling , Useful in the Past. 

It may be objected to our theory of Precincts, that great ad 
vantages have followed the past policy of the United States, in 
the intermingling of all classes. We answer, that in arguing for 
the future, for persons of different religions politics and classes, 
to form Precincts by themselves, we must admit that great ad 
vantages have accrued in the past, from arranging so that all 
intermingled freely, thereby breaking down " caste." We may 
even admit that if the balance of advantage is yet in favor of 
the present plan, nevertheless we may see, that in many places 
we are approaching a class of evils of an opposite kind ; that, 
anarchy and irreligion are being established, and parental rights 
swept away by the extreme of the intermingling which we in 
the United States are accomplishing ; and that we are now just 
about the turning point, when, though the intermingling policy 
of past years, still may have the benefit of the argument in 
thinly settled country places, yet in cities, towns, and even in 
thickly settled agricultural and mining regions, the old method 
has evidently passed its greatest point of usefulness, and the new 


order is absolutely demanded by the balance of influences. In 
general therefore we may infer, that the intermingling era is 
passing away by tacit but common consent; and that the time 
is coming for re-organization. 

What is now far more to be guarded against, is the friction of 
the different classes or colors, in the same localities. For, the 
nearer people are together, the more they hate each other for the 
small differences of daily life, as those small differences bring 
them into more and more disputation and variance; and conse 
quently they are more and more stimulated to and upheld in 
those oppositions, by those of the same class or color, than when 
apart from the others at their homes or recreations. The case 
is the same as with the progress in machinery. At first, fric 
tion is not thought of at all ; but in the later and higher devel 
opments, the study how to lessen friction, becomes one of the 
most important of all, both to the mechanic and to the inventor. 

The intermingled modes of life, in mixed Precincts as now 
most commonly found, are doubtless unobjectionable, so long as 
the friction is but small, and as their citizens can live harmoni 
ously together, and retain a good degree of mutual sympathy and 
mutual regard for the rights and feelings of their neighbors. 
But unfortunately, this is becoming a less and less frequent case. 
Pride and tyranny on the one side, and pride and envy on the 
other, are stimulating men everywhere into antithetic positions. 
Everybody wants to be despotic to his inferiors, " superior to his 
equals, and equal to his superiors." Hence a universal deep 
undercurrent of discontent. And this gives rise to the neces 
sity of allowing persons who are unhappy under their present 
conditions,' to form new relations and new residences, upon 
principles which seem promising of contentment and peace. 

It might be apprehended that the collection in the same locali 
ties, of persons of the same character, would produce narrow- 
mindedness, and prevent general improvement, as it formerly 
has done. But times have much altered. Now the art of 
printing, the diffusion of education, the dissemination of public 
presses, and the addition of the telegraph, are bringing all parts 
of the world into such close acquaintance with each other, that 
the old dangers of localization are not to be feared. The union 
bet\veen characteristics and ideas of whole peoples, which for- 


194 BK - II. PRECINCT. II. X. 

merly could only be accomplished by union of blood, and mix 
ture of tribes, can now be largely fulfilled by the transmission 
of ideas, and the spread of cosmopolite sympathies. 

Such is the intimacy of distant localities, that merely geo 
graphical distinctions alone, in a nation, especially in ours, are 
ceasing to be real checks or balances in the working of govern 
ment. And since the abolition of slavery, the old geographical 
checks are passing away insensibly, leaving no balances in our 
government at all, of any value for good ; but rather oppositions 
and old enmities, without sufficient moral powers to balance 

If however, the time is not yet near for a change of policy 
in these respects, or even if our argument against intermingling 
be deemed entirely and eternally erroneous, then let it be remem 
bered that our proposed Corporation-system, would not interfere 
with the usual intermingling, but still would furnish most of the 
political advantages of the Precinct-system. See Corporation. 
2. Danger of Secession. 

If the objection were raised, that the dividing up of a Nation 
into Precincts would make the chances of secession easier, we 
would reply, that it would have just the opposite effect; and this 
would be the case in two entirely different ways. (1) For, the 
larger the number of Precincts the Nation was divided into, the 
less would be the chances of corrupting Individuals, and obtain 
ing their votes by cheating ; for it could not possibly be known 
beforehand, which way each Precinct would vote, when there 
was such a large number of them ; and therefore it could not 
be known which ones to cheat in, or how many. In the late 
war, this corrupting and cheating were actually done in several 
instances; and states were said to have given majorities for 
secession, which had not done so at all, but the true votes had 
been concealed and false returns made. It will be seen at once, 
that where there is such a large number of Precincts as we pro 
pose, the number of Individuals required to give false returns 
will be largely increased. 

(2) And besides this there is another reason : the more Pre 
cincts a Nation is composed of, the less the population of each 
will be, and the less the number of voters ; and therefore false 
returns would surely be detected, and that being foreknown, they 


would be prevented. For where there is any doubt, the returns 
can at once be examined, and every real and authorized voter 
can be reached and examined. 

The true doctrine of our " American " states" is, that they are 
Corporations. This we will endeavor to show under Part III., 
speaking of the relations of Precincts, Cities, and States, to Cor 
porations. This shows at once the absurdity of that theory of 
state rights, which, involving secession with it, too, viewed those 
merely chartered organizations called states, as being the original 
sources from which all power was derived, both above and below 
them. In their origin too, as colonies, most of them were actually 
chartered organizations. But having gradually absorbed from 
and robbed, the Precincts, of their natural and proper rights, and 
having allowed the growth of the body to dispel the soul out of 
one social unit, they aimed next, to suck the soul out of the 
other junit, that is, the Nation. The pride that grew up out of 
the first usurpations, led directly to the ambition that aimed at 
the second. 

But now let us ask, will it help the matter any, to transfer 
that usurped power from state to Nation, and allow one natural, 
element at one end of the scale, to exercise all the powers belong 
ing to the other end of the scale ? Whilst the states were lifting 
up their heads, there was a superior power over them which they 
well knew and feared. But if that superior power itself assumes 
their functions, where is the power to check IT ? There is no 
human power, but foreign. Hence, let us now return to first 
and sound principles, and restore power to Precincts. 

Another argument against the danger of secession, is found in 
the fact, that adjoining localities generally form spontaneous 
political REACTIONS to each other. And as every Precinct is, 
by our theory, balanced by its Amalgam with the sum of its 
adjoining Precincts, there would generally exist a spontaneous 
balancing power to the extreme tendencies of any Precinct in 
particular. The most unlike in property, would often go to 
gether, namely, the richest and the poorest. And in between 
pairs of such Precincts, would generally be intermediate ones for 
mechanical purposes, stores, &c., because they would be needed 
by the adjoining Precincts. All the Precincts of one kind would 
not be formed in contiguity, partly because of business demands, 

196 BK - n. PRECINCT, ii. x. 

and partly because of the expenses of removal to great distances, 
and partly because of the ties of relationship refusing to be 
broken by very great distances. No such great diversity of 
geographical interests or feelings, could take place, as now exists 
between East and West, or between North and South. 

The natural tendency of localities to form political reactions 
with adjoining localities, may not be easily explained, but is 
nevertheless very easily proved to be a fact. For instance, at 
the breaking out of the Southern rebellion, the rabid pro-slavery 
Eastern Virginia was surrounded by Maryland, Delaware, West 
ern Virginia and North Carolina. The rabid pro-slavery South 
Carolina was touched' by the staunch old Whig states of North 
Carolina and Florida, and only by the moderately pro-slavery 
state of Georgia. The fire-eating state of Mississippi was touched 
by Whig Louisiana and Tennessee, and by the moderately pro- 
slavery Alabama. And the Fame similar general law is found 
to hold in the case of the old Whig states, which were sur 
rounded by or chiefly touched by rabid pro-slavery sections ; for 
instance, South Carolina by North Carolina and Florida, with 
moderate Georgia, Louisiana touched by rabid Mississippi and 
Texas. Sometimes, however, it is necessary to take two states 
or parts of states together, as one locality, to show the effects of 
the principle in every case. But enough has been said to show 
the principle. It must be remembered that the politics of the 
Southern States were very different before the war, from what 
they are now : the metaphysical reactions being from pro-slavery 
to freedom, of some, and from old union to everlasting grum 
bling of the others. The soldiers in rebellion became the sol 
diers in submission. 

But the principle is, there would be quite as much danger of 
civil war between adjoining Precincts, in their reactions against 
each other, as there would be of the secession from the Nation, 
of Precincts in combination. But now what shall we say : 
that our proposed system is liable to BOTH these objections, 
namely, civil war between Precincts in some places? and seces 
sion of combined Precincts in other places? Or shall we not 
say, that both these anticipated evils only COUNTERBALANCE 
each other, and thus nullify each other ? Besides, we have the 
power of the Amalgams, which would be quite as efficient and 


even more efficient, to check riot and to prevent civil war be 
tween the Precincts of which an Amalgam was composed, than 
they would be in . preventing secession from the Nation. But 
now, the simple truth is, that in any case of disorder, whether 
towards secession of, or towards intestine war between, Precincts, 
every Precinct and every Amalgam of Precincts, would have the 
same right to call for support from the Nation, as any state now 
has, or as any county now has to call upon its state for aid. 
Both Precincts and Amalgams, would have direct recourse to the 
aid of the national government; and the complex relations of 
the subordinate parts of the Nation, would have nothing what 
ever to do with the question, in case of any kind of resort to arms. 

Another safeguard in our theory, against any attempt at 
secession, is the doctrine already laid down under our general 
idea of the Six UNITS, and especially under the head of " Re 
bellion of Precincts/' in which place we endeavor to show that 
Precincts have no rights of sovereignty, and no other right of 
rebellion, than what every living creature has when sufficiently 
aggrieved.' The sovereignty of the Precinct is no part of a 
theory of six units, any more than that of the Individual, or of 
the Family, or of any other of the six. 

The real dangers of secession, are not at all in the direction 
of formal local subdivision, but in the direction of too rapid in 
crease of population, that is, too rapid for our science as yet; 
and in too great a diffusion thereof; and in rebellions being fos 
tered by foreign Nations, because of our audacious violations of 
the laws of Nations, subjects which are treated under the head 
of " International law" and in other appropriate places. 
3. Confederacy, or Nation ? 

There is one objection that may possibly be offered, which, in 
its assumptions is so contrary to the whole theory, as scarcely to 
deserve mention, and yet it may perhaps be better to anticipate 
it directly. The assertion may be made that our theory tends 
to produce a confederacy instead of a Nation. Now the answer 
to this is, that we have all along maintained, that a part of the 
"State" powers must be assigned to the Nation, that our 
theory upon the whole, does not increase the totality of the 
" State" powers, but only re-arranges them, giving more power 
in some respects, but less, in other respects. And as to the mere 


difference in size of the Precincts, although we may say, that as 
a tendency of human nature, the larger the size and therefore 
the smaller the number, of states, the more their junction has 
the appearance of a mere confederacy, and vice-versa; never 
theless, size of subdivision's does not affect the principle at all, 
and need not be discussed. 

4. Objections from the Scriptures. 

It has been objected to our theory, by some who attach greater 
comparative importance to Nation than to state or Precinct, that 
the very frequent use of the word " Nations" in the Scriptures, 
in reference to the original inhabitants of the neighborhood of 
Judea, is against us. But " Nations" in those cases only mean 
what they do when applied to the various tribes of American 
Indians,^as for instance, the " Six Nations." But the thing 
meant by Nation in these cases, evidently comes much nearer to 
our idea of Precinct, than to the thing now meant by Nation as 
that word is now understood. And the same is also the case 
generally, in the histories of primitive times. 

Another objection from the Scriptures might be, that the final 
secession of a large part of the Jewish Nation, speaks unfavor 
ably for the permanency of tribal Precincts. But this secession 
is another argument from Scripture, to the contrary. The He 
brew Nation, it is true, was divided into tribes, and great care 
was taken to maintain the distinctness and completeness of each 
one. But it is also true, that in the course of time, excessive 
power became vested in the central government, namely, the 
kings, and this did not arise from its nature as a Nation, but 
from the ancient absolutism of Eastern feelings and Eastern 
Monarchies. But in the original structure of the Hebrew polity, 
and after its war-polity under Moses and Joshua ended, the 
Nation possessed no physical power or physical organ expressing 
its unity. This unity depended exclusively on the moral powers, 
especially the moral Corporation of Levi, and the moral power 
of the prophets, and the sense of nationality. And these moral 
powers had been more efficient in preserving the union, than the 
despotic power of the kings was subsequently. In fact, the real 
cause of the civil Avar that finally broke up the Hebrew Nation, 
was, each party in its turn endeavoring to control the centraliz 
ing power, and thus to force its own views and polity upon all 


the Precincts ; and calling in foreign aid for that purpose. And 
to speak more generally, the falling away of the more distant 
localities, has always been one of the steps in the decay of states, 
Nations, confederacies, and empires. 


The general principle of law hitherto has been, that mines of 
precious metals belong to the Nation, and that even the sale and 
title to land do not naturally alienate the Nation's right to pre 
cious minerals. And we know now that all minerals are pre 
cious. The principle is good ; Justice to all, as also the historical 
troubles in many mining districts, help to confirm the principle. 
Mines therefore, like sea-coasts, and like Large Cities, which we 
shall treat of in the next chapter, should be amenable to the 
Nation directly. Strictly mining districts, if thickly populated, 
ought, like " States" and Large Cities, to be considered as double 
Corporations, having one of their charters from the Nation itself. 
But if thinly populated, they ought to be treated like " territo 
ries" not yet admitted to be full State-Precincts, but only pre 
paring so to be, and meanwhile be under the control of the 
Nation alone. 


1. Federative Corporations. 

(a) Classifications. When we 'came to the consideration of 
large cities, those which according to our limitations of popula 
tion would consist* of several Precincts, we were halted for a 
long time, unable to decide where to place them. We had long 
decided to ignore altogether, what are commonly in America, 
called "States," thinking that all their functions could prop 
erly be analyzed and divided off, partly to Precinct and partly 
to Nation. But the consideration of large cities soon re-opened 
the question about ignoring " States," and showed plainly that 
they and large cities both, must come under the same closely 
related category; the only difference in principle being the 
geographical extent of the states, and even this difference being 
counteracted in many cases, by the much greater population of 
the cities. It was furthermore evident, that states had provi- 


dentially served to counteract the cities by furnishing a sufficient 
country population for that purpose. But still, the doubt was 
as unsettled as ever, where to classify BOTH of them. 

It was evidently possible according to our theory, to take 
two entirely different views of states and large cities. On the 
one hand it was possible to consider them as a sort of inter- 
preciuct-federations, a sort of inter-national-like federations be 
tween Precincts : and on the other hand it was possible to 
conceive of them as Corporations chartered by the Nation. A 
prolonged inability to decide between these two possibilities, at 
last draws us to accept a compromise between them, and we will 
call the resultant name Federative Corporation. This compro 
mise may be stated thus : States and large cities are SPONTA 
NEOUS corporations with DOUBLE charters, one charter from the 
Nation above them, and the other charter from the Precincts 
below them. There is no more difficulty in conceiving this 
thought, than in conceiving the thought of a railroad deriving 
its charter from two different states, which is a very frequent 
occurrence. But we must remember, that As Corporations they 
are spontaneous, and have their right of charter given by nature, 
without the artifice or deliberation of man ; and therefore it 
would be quite as true an idea to conceive of states and cities, 
as confederations of Precincts, duly authorized by the Nation. 

The only difficulty is, to see how the old " Colonies" or " Settle 
ments/ 7 which previously and historically had been natural and 
valid Precincts, 'should have gradually and insensibly lost that 
character, and have become Corporations. And furthermore, 
some which had at first been actual Corporations, and then 
changed into real Precincts, then again gradually changed back 
into Corporations, of our present "State" kind. The solution 
is to be found in the Tribe-principle. Because Precinct and Cor 
poration are two of the elements of the Tribe ; and as has been 
previously stated, one of the peculiar traits of all the three ele 
ments of the Tribe is, their tendency to and facility of, inter 
changing themselves, one for the other. And this very tendency 
and facility, are some of the reasons why those three elements 
had to be co-ordinated into one in our general theory. 

Reasonably therefore, it was deemed best to place this subject 
at the end of the treatment of the Precinct. And this was espe- 


cially necessary, because without it, the theory of the Precinct 
would be incomplete and unsatisfactory. Nevertheless > we re 
tain a place and heading for this subject in the classification 
of Corporations, for the satisfaction of those persons who would 
prefer the latter place for it. We might perhaps ourself have 
preferred CORPORATION as the best place for it, were it not that 
that subject, as an element of government, is less familiar to 
the reader and much more difficult and complicated in its own 
nature ; and therefore it was deemed best to keep it as unen 
cumbered as possible. 

We say then, all political or governmental organizations or 
divisions, superior to the small Precinct, except the Nation, may 
be regarded as federative Corporations constituted by the union 
of Precincts. 

(6) Right of Precincts to form into Federative Corporations. 
The necessity for an express charter or legal permission for the 
existence of any Corporations, whether financial or political, is 
not at all inherent natural or necessary to the matter. This 
necessity has arisen under English laws, and because of a lum 
bering clumsy artificiality of our laws, which arbitrarily stand 
ready to construe a union for any special purpose (except pur 
chasing or holding of Real Estate) as an unlimited partnership 
for all purposes. In nature, (as indeed ought to be the case in 
the law) all voluntary partnerships are limited, which do not 
expressly assert the contrary; yet in law, the reverse is the 
arbitrary principle. But now, when the voluntary association 
becomes greatly co-extensive with any one neighborhood, there 
arises a Precinct business interest, and this interest, in the acci 
dents of history, was necessitated to obtain charters and become 
Corporations, as in the free cities of Europe. And this again, 
not because of any inherent necessity, but because these Corpo 
rations had arisen among the industrial classes, who were then 
serfs, only gradually becoming either free in person, or capable 
of holding property or of self-government, and only gradually 
asking their rights from the landed and feudal aristocracy. And 
thus the charters of these free states, were in a degree, obtaining 
freedom, property and self-government, all at once, for such Pre 
cincts. Thus it often happens, that an artificial or secondarily 
derived Corporation, namely a State or Barony, gives the legal 

202 BK - IL PRECIXCT. ii. xii. 

status or authority to a natural and original Corporation, by ac 
knowledging to it the return, of a measure of the rights to 
which it is rightfully entitled by natural principles of justice 
and Social Science. 

We see there are several kinds of Corporations, commonly" so 
called. One kind, the Precinct itself, we do not count as a Cor 
poration, but as an eternal spontaneity and natural unit of society. 
But those subsidiary Corporations that may be created within its 
limits, are our first kind. The other kinds are secondary, con 
sisting of those which are more or less outside of the individual 
Precinct. Now, our theory regarding the Precincts as the origi 
nal elements or units of power, requires us to admit, as of agents, 
the equal rights of such Corporations as consist of either two or 
more Precincts, and also of such voluntary associations as two or 
more of them may incorporate or constitute : We mean the equal 
ity of their rights with those of Corporations organized or con 
stituted by central national powers, so that these again must at 
any rate be classified into a third kind, or tertiary Corporations, 
and on entirely different principles from the former two kinds. 

And then again, there is a kind of corporation which is, as it 
were, a delegate authorized by a delegate, namely a corporation 
authorized by a previous yet continuing corporation. Such are 
all the corporations which are chartered by those mongrel in 
stitutions we call states. For these states themselves, being only 
corporations of a peculiar kind, present this singular phenom 
enon, of one corporation authorizing and chartering another for 
political functions, and also for other businesses. Such are 
nearly all the railroads, canals, and business corporations in 
the United States. The only powers that ought to pretend to 
charter any thing, are the Nation and the small Precincts; and 
charters ought to be as easy and as free as partnerships. 

If we admit, for states as well as cities, only the status of cor 
porations, and not that of fundamental 'instinctive elements or 
units of society, we would not undervalue them thereby; because 
our theory elevates corporation itself, from the position of a mere 
creature of government, to that of a fundamental, although arti 
ficial or rational element. By thus elevating the corporation, 
we would not degrade the city and state. The thing that our 
theory really does affect, is the Precinct, which it raises at one 


bound, from the low position given to it by the low theory of 
corporation, to the high position of a fundamental instinctive 
unit of society. 

(c) Temporary uses of "States." Although the division of 
Nations into provinces and states, has no foundation in the 
fundamental principles of government; yet, so long as Social 
Science is in its infancy, and Mankind so imperfect, the division 
is of very high importance as a provisional one for temporary 
purposes. For one thing ; a province or state serves providen 
tially to counterbalance the large city, by a power that will do 
the least evil in proportion to the amount of good ; for there is 
no other power that can be proposed for such a counterbalance, 
except the Nation. But inasmuch as corruption increases in 
direct ratios, to the sum of the population, the size of the coun 
try, and the distance of the party governed from the party 
governing; but is in the inverse ratio to the restrictions of 
power; it is inferable without doubt, that in general, the 
national power operating directly as a check to the city, would 
be overwhelming, and thus be a worse balancing organ than some 
intermediate political power, which should be similar in one of 
the two great elements constituting the divisions ; for instance, 
similar in population, as it of course could not be similar in 
geographical surface. But you may ask, why should surface 
have any thing to do with it? We answer, because surface, al 
though little for aggression, is every thing for defence; and 
because surface scantly occupied, belongs to futurity. 

Another use of states, so long as they are maintained, has 
been for state prisons, and might be to make punishment-cities 
more practicable. In order to form such cities large enough to 
be useful, they would need to be the receptacles of the criminals 
from many Precincts. And this would require, either, state or 
national co-operation, unless indeed it were deemed better to let 
the Precincts themselves make special leagues or confederations 
for such purposes. But this would require a very high degree 
of Christian civilization, to justify it, or to make it successful. 

2. Cities equivalent to States, in rights and responsibilities. 

One of the foundations for State, in distinction from Precinct 
and Nation, is the existence of metropolitan cities, which, states 
sometimes claim as the property of the one in which they are 

204 BK - ii. PRECINCT, ii. xii. 

located. But such a claim is generally spurious, and in the case 
of large cities, always so. For instance, the city of Philadelphia 
belongs as much in its business relations, and also socially and 
financially, to New Jersey and Delaware, in proportion to their 
size, as it does to Pennsylvania. Likewise New York City be 
longs to New Jersey, Khode Island and Connecticut, as well. 
But the fact is, that all these large cities belong to the Nation, 
socially and financially. It is the national trade and tariff that 
has built these metropolitan cities. It is the trade both domestic 
and foreign, of the separate parts of the whole Nation. Hence, 
such a city has a better claim on principle, to be an original unit, 
that is, a state, than any one of the several United States them 
selves. And as long as the mongrel distinctions of State are 
kept up, these metropolitan cities ought to claim as a right, that 
they should be co-equal states, and no longer subject to the 
fleecings and petty tyrannies of state legislatures, but responsible 
only and directly to the general government on the one hand, 
and to the people who inhabit, and to the Precincts of which 
they are composed, on the other hand. But, until government 
becomes better, perhaps all these complications are, merely diffi 
culties in the way of greater evils. But the plea of a certain 
great city, to be elevated into a state, in the midst of a great 
war which it had indirectly done much to produce, was not 
just. Let it stay, and take its share of its own evils ; and 
" never swap horses in crossing a stream." 

Cities therefore, especially large ones, should be under the 
control of some supervisory larger country power, either of 
state, as at present, or rather and especially under the national 
government ; because they are morally and metaphysically the 
product and property of the whole public, or Nation, and profit 
by the Nation's trade and progress pre-eminently. 

But besides these things, also their powers over the state, their 
ability to sustain taxation, and their special corruptibility, and 
the fact of the invariable collection of special wickednesses that 
voluntarily flow into them, all require their submission to a 
superior agricultural or country power. 

And such a submission has its logical justification or basis, in 
this, that cities are the offspring of and dependent upon, a large 
agricultural or country district, for their very existence. 


It is quite apparent to all thinking persons, that the manner 
is grossly unjust, in which, for instance, the Legislatures of New 
York and Pennsylvania, tyrannize over their great Metropolises. 
It is equally apparent, that it would be productive of immense 
evil, to allow New York City to begin now to govern itself, and, 
that the government would be administered in the interests of 
the lawless and disorderly. In fact, the legislative aid of the 
state has been invoked by the order-loving citizens, to preserve 
their city from evil ; although the case is different in Pennsyl 
vania. Hence we see that neither the state nor the city itself, 
can be trusted to govern a metropolitan city. That the national 
government could not be trusted with the internal administration 
of such a city, is evidenced by the mal-administration of Wash 
ington City for many years. 

The only alleviation is, to have the city divided into a large 
number of small Precincts, each of which shall have its own 
internal newly apportioned state rights, and each be responsible 
to the general government, by itself. Then the Precincts that 
would allow the disorderly to rule, would soon be forsaken by the 
orderly and peace-loving citizens, who would naturally fall into 
Precincts by themselves ; and the disorderly and riotous might 
perhaps murder and fight one another to their hearts' content, so 
long as they did not interfere with their neighboring peaceable 
Precincts, nor with migrating out of them, nor the transit 
through them ; as, in that case they would come under the 
defence and military possession of the National or General 
Government, the same as any other Eebels. 

The experiment of allowing the "state" governments to con 
trol the affairs, and alter the charters, of large cities at will, has 
been tried and found wanting and abandoned, both in Pennsyl 
vania and New York. A state should have no more right to 
prescribe the width, direction or other circumstances, of the ordi 
nary streets or City-Rail-Ways &c., IN the city, than the general 
government itself. 

On the other hand, any particular neighborhood or township, 
has as good a right to say, whether it will support any religion, 
whether it will allow Sunday travel, (of course except the travel 
under government sanction of the larger district or province, for 
instance the Mail), what the conditions of Divorce of its own 

206 BK - IL PRECINCT. II. xii. 

citizens, and whether it will license liquor or brothels, and 
whether it will make all real estate return to a general fund, 
(of course compensating all the present holders), and what com 
munistic or other moral experiments may be allowed : Each 
neighborhood has the same political right to do these things for 
itself, under certain restrictions, as the state itself is now allowed 
to have ; and with the new apportionment and balances of power ; 
more right. The business of a "state" is not arrogantly to 
assume all these rights to itself, but only to prescribe and define 
the reasonable limits, within which, each neighborhood and town 
ship and county may regulate these matters for themselves. 

This theory, it will be seen, claims for neighborhoods, many 
rights which the advocates of ultra-individual liberty, claim for 
the Individual, and is thus a compromise between theories that 
hitherto have seemed to be in radical opposition. It is also a 
compromise in various other respects. And here a word might 
be dropped quietly in the ear of the new society advocating God 
and religion, &c., in the national constitution. Supposing for 
argument's sake that they are right from their stand-point, as to 
their religious principles, and as to the general idea of the rela 
tion between religion and government; still they fail .entirely to 
discriminate between the Precinct and the Nation, as organs of 
accomplishing the Divine will in government. And the same 
want of discrimination seems to be made by their opponents, 
whether high church or non-church men, of whatever affilia 

In cities, the close proximity of the population of many Pre 
cincts, without any geographical lines' or distances between them, 
constitutes their chief peculiarity : thus, the peculiar functions 
of cities require the putting forth of new organs. And the idea 
that sums up all these organs, under which they must classify 
themselves, is, special organizations of all these small Precincts, 
of which they are composed. Besides being divided into small 
Precincts, the same as said above, the special organization of the 
whole city should have special powers, the exact limits of which 
are not easy to give fully, until after some experience shall have 
been had, and further study given to its details. Nor is it neces 
sary to discover all the details of a plan, before perceiving the 
utility in general of the plan itself. 


A consolidated municipal Police and Board of Health would 
at least be necessary ; whilst the Fire Department and Boards 
of Trade, Water and Gas, might be either municipal powers, or 
special corporations. Probably the city government might be 
best accomplished by an equal number of rulers, chosen partly 
according to its own general municipal principles and by its 
own members ; and partly by the state, so long as such mongrels 
as our states are tolerated, or instead thereof, by the national 
government. This is proposed as a constitution for the general 
city power ; and of course is not intended to disturb the Precinct- 
powers, reserved to each of the many small Precincts which the 
city is to be considered as consisting of. 

We need not depend on theory alone for the settlement of 
these questions, but on actual experiment. The city of Phila 
delphia, for 150 years, that is from its origin until about the 
year 1850, consisted of several distinct corporations or boroughs, 
as distinct as Philadelphia is from Pittsburg. Afterwards they 
became consolidated into one corporation, and that experiment 
has been tried for fifteen or twenty years. The subsequent 
amount of corruption and destruction of private rights, clearly 
proves that the larger the political organization, the more cor 
rupt it becomes. The only objection to the old organization of 
independent boroughs, was the facility which it gave for rowdies 
and criminals to escape from one borough into another. But 
after suffering for many years, the boroughs adopted an organ 
ization of consolidated police, and this effectually corrected the 
evil. The city had not been governed nearly so well for twenty 
years before, and has never been better governed since. Although 
Mayor Henry did as well as mortal could do. This consolida 
tion of police, cured the evil ; and is one illustration, among 
many that might be given, why Precincts with state-powers, 
should be allowed to form special leagues with each other. 

Another instance is the city of London, which, during all 
the hundreds of years of its existence, and to this day, although 
the largest city in the world, consists of a number of distinct 
and separate corporate boroughs. 

3. Special Needs in Large Cities. 

(a) In General. Cities are entirely an artificial product, and 
city life is not entirely an instinctive one ; therefore men, like 


animals when out of their instinctive life, are unable to help 
themselves by their unaided ordinary instinctive powers. Cities 
therefore require a high degree of social science. Yet Spencer 
makes no radical allowance for city organization. His theory 
will not answer for " Corporations." He requires such a per 
sistent adherence to the " let alone" doctrine, as to advise even 
that the streets should be allowed to become foul, until by pro 
ducing diseases and annoyances, and affecting the prices of Real 
Estate, and the standard of the neighborhood, capitalists may 
ultimately be induced to form voluntary corporations for the 
purpose of cleaning them, without the aid or prompting of the 
city government. 

Up to a certain point of size, cities or towns improve the 
health and morality of Mankind. Just in proportion as men 
get nearer together, their intercourse becomes more frequent, and 
general intelligence increases. Brought together for business or 
occupation, they yet derive, incidentally, other and very different 
advantages, from the very frequent intercourse of social life, 
increased opportunities and inducements for intellectual and 
moral culture, and for religious exercises. The very fact itself 
of a larger circle of personal acquaintances, contributes to the 
general improvement of the inhabitants. 

Nevertheless, it must be deeply felt by every practical social 
scientist, that large cities present many features requiring special 
treatment, and produce many special vices dangers and suffer 
ings, difficult to cope with successfully, by any treatment yet 
imagined. Statistics drawn from some of the old cities of 
Europe show, that the population actually dies out every few 
(say six or seven) generations, and that they are sustained only 
by the influx of new blood and new persons from the country. 
This course of things shows there is something radically wrong, 
either in city life itself, or in the lack of discovery as yet of the 
true principles of city government. We shall have occasion to 
examine into this matter at some length, under the heads of 
" Health" and " Life." At present, all we can delay to con 
sider is, the relation of this subject to our Precinct-theory, 
namely, to constituting cities into small Precincts for their polit 
ical administration. We may remark then, that all the general 
arguments for our theory are, like everything else, intensified, 


when applied to large cities. \Ve may also remark that the 
growth of very large cities ought to be discouraged ; and their 
connection with the whole national power, might tend in that 
direction; but that "state" powers foster the LARGE cities. Be 
cause no state has more than one such, and therefore encourages 
concentration ; but the national policy would be, as it generally 
has been, to encourage the dissemination of population. In 
fact, the function of new cities is just as much a part of our 
national policy, as the settlement of new farms. 

(b) Residences and Occupations too far Apart. Next, coming 
to the special arguments ; the great political object is to induce 
citizens to reside within the Precincts where their occupation 
lies. To this end the following reasons may be given. Yet the 
great remedy is the Precinct-system. Minor remedies may come 
up under " Civil Government." But at present all we can do, 
is to give some reasons or arguments for this uniting of resi 
dences and occupations in near neighborhood. 

(1) Under the present scattering system, the number of in 
habitants becomes so great, and the Individual persons so fluc 
tuating, that the citizens become less and less watchers or critics 
of one another, whether for preventing wrong doing, or for 
arresting criminals. Then the criminals can find hiding places 
in obscure lanes and bye- ways, and under the cover of acquaint 
ances whose occupations are unknown ; then morality begins to 
deteriorate, temptations increase, and the powers of counterac 
tion proportionately decrease. (2) Another point of decrease 
of honor and general morality in cities, is reached, when their 
residents in large numbers become so fashionable or so enfeebled 
in health, that they must remove their residences to some dif 
ferent and distant parts of the city, from those in which they 
fulfill their daily Occupations. This works badly in several 
ways. In one way, it has a similar eifect to increasing the tran 
sient and fluctuating part of the population ; it gives each resi 
dent so much less time and so much less interest in the 
neighborhoods, both of his residence and his occupation. Fur 
thermore, some of the best hours of the day are lost in the 
travel to and fro. (3) The head of the house is absent from 
his home, when he may be wanted in case of family disputes, 
and, needed correction of children. The women become more 



and more given to trifling; the sanctity of marriage is more and 
more endangered. All the better feelings of family life are 
more and more interrupted. (4) Another way in which this 
increasing size and incidental residence, distant from the places of 
occupation, does injury, is, that the business districts, after being 
forsaken as abodes by those who ought to continue near or in 
them, often become occupied by the lowest classes of society, 
in that interim between the time of their being aristocratic 
enough for residences, and the time of their becoming wanted 
for grand stores and offices. A large Precinct of this kind, con 
taining the largest portion of the city's wealth, will sometimes 
be inhabited chiefly by Individuals who have neither property, 
reputation, nor permanent residence in the locality. Our Pre 
cinct-theory would not at all apply to such cases. To prevent 
the political and party evils arising from these causes, the wards 
in Philadelphia are often found divided so as to be, say, two 
miles long, and only one-eighth of a mile wide ; which is a vio 
lation of the first principles of the geography of the Precinct- 
system, and increases the social and moral evils working at the 

(c) Growth of Cities too Rapid for Social Science. The evils in 
large cities may be classified according to two principles of sepa 
ration. One, according to their origin, as physical, metaphysical, 
and moral, the other according to their degree of permanence 
into removable, and irremovable, or as the New York Council 
of Hygiene, in regard only to physical health, says, " prevent 
able/' and " not preventable." But after all, the classification 
of removable or irremovable, is very defective for Social Science, 
in the question regarding the size of cities; because size itself has 
all imperceptible degrees, and because the relation of size is com 
plicated again with, and ever varies with the capacity of Social 
Science to cope with the subject. 

It must be admitted, that the tendency of men to concentrate 
in cities, has ever been in advance of the morality and the sci 
ences that are necessary to govern them. So that even under 
despotic governments, they become pests morally and socially; 
whilst in republics, in addition to these evils, there are the evils 
of riot and mob-ocracy. Hence, one of the necessary methods 
of preventing the evils is, checking the growth itself, until social 


and political science can come nearer to catching up with the 
evils. Hence then, it becomes prudent to discourage the too 
rapid influx of human beings into ONE locality. And this is 
best effected, in the usual and most approved manner of social 
retardments, especially by direct taxes, and sufficient in amount 
to effect the objects aimed at, 

Accordingly, taxes should be imposed in cities on the male 
population over the age of 18. Also, a tax per acre on the 
amount of ground built upon, not counting the yards or areas 
not built upon. Also a tax per cubic foot of all buildings, except 
residences of small tenants ; tax to be paid by the owner. Also 
a tax on all living expenditures over certain specified amounts 
per person of any age ; tax to be paid by the head of the Family. 
These extra taxes should be commanded, and their total Precinct 
amounts, or else their percentages, should be specified in general, 
by the government of the state or Nation ; but the PROCEEDS 
should be collected and expended by the Amalgam of the city 
Precincts, and be expended solely for the physical and moral 
improvement of the city itself, and be fairly apportioned to 
each Precinct therein, instead of, for instance, on the principle 
of having all in one grand park, and that perhaps, 3 or 4 miles 
from the city's centre where fresh air is most needed. Further 
more, all private persons who have open lots duly planted, 
should be accounted benefactors, and so much of their lots as 
were thus planted, should be exempt from all taxation. 

In these and all other possible ways, the rules and expenditures 
which tended DIRECTLY to discourage the increase of the city, 
should INCIDENTALLY tend to make it more healthy and more 
moral. But there are so many evils to be counteracted, that only 
faithful and long continued experiments, can prove what are the 
best methods of counteraction. 

One of the most important views of the advantages of small 
Precincts, will be found in connection with cities : because the 
advantages of the system will be most apparent among them; 
both because there is the most need for this principle of sub 
division, and also because, by the facility of removals, the plan 
would the more easily be put into actual operation. Indeed, 
perhaps cities are the places appointed by Providence, for the 
trial of most kinds of practical " experiments ;" for therein 


the results become quickly visible to a multitude of " ob 

(d) Plan of treating Fallen Districts. Here is a plan for bene- 
fitting Five Points, Bedford street, Sink, and other such places, 
and is a sort of exception to other general rules. 

A Precinct of this kind, would bear a somewhat similar rela 
tion to the city, that a city now under the old theory, bears to the 
state, which in fact is somewhat similar in principle, to what a 
conquered province bears to the conquering country, after the 
return to a condition of settled peace. It is a kind of absolute 
dependence of the smaller upon the greater; exercised partly 
for the good of the province itself, and partly for the good of the 
whole. The fall of any Precinct into the condition of a rendez 
vous for social outcasts, must be regarded as in principle, a sort 
of rebellion against the general city, however sincere, however 
mistaken, however ill-treated, tke rebels may be, or conceive 
themselves to be. But on the other hand, as these kinds of 
rebels have the right to live, the rebellion must be treated rather 
as one by a Locality, than as one by Individuals. It is a rebel 
lion whose essence consists, not in violence against human wills, 
nor in warring against the citizens generally; but rather as a 
taking away of the public land. The world's plan is, to turn 
the poor creatures out of doors, every once in a while, to please 
fanatical zeal. 

Our plan is as follows. 

Let the neighborhood within prescribed limits, be legally con 
stituted, separately, into a Reformatory Precinct under the imme 
diate control of some sufficiently general and superior power. 
This would naturally draw many respectable people out of it. 
These should be compensated, in all cases where the law is 
applied, either suddenly or soon after the time of the enactment 
thereof. Constituting the locality into a Reformatory Precinct, 
would give special powers to make special regulations binding on 
property holders, to keep the places decently clean and healthy. 
The power of the municipal government, when fully applied, 
should, extend to confining the residents within the Precinct. But 
not to exclude honest citizens, having known and visibly honest 
means of support &c. from entering and returning. Special per 
mits might be given to the most deserving and improving resi- 


dents, to go out to work, or to gather fragments. It should also 
prevent any other persons from moving into it, to reside therein. 
Stations of work, and of gratuitous supply of the absolute neces 
saries of life, should be located there. All spirituous liquors 
should be kept out, and dram shops closed up therein. The 
women . and children should be specially cared for, with more 
minor comforts than the men. Schools for teaching, not only 
the rudiments of reading, writing, arithmetic &c.; but also for 
teaching the common sense principles of success in every day 
life, the principal motives and uses for common self-control, 
common morality, and the rudiments of responsibility and grati 
tude to God and man; as enforced by suffering and as taught by 
nature. Free encouragement should be given to the various 
religious missions, to maintain their good works ; and suitable 
buildings or rooms should be furnished to them by the city, 
without charge. A small prison should be arranged within the 
Precinct itself, and a special police arrangement to suit the 
peculiar people. Small sums of money should be given to them 
as rewards. A portion of the houses should be taken to supply 
free lodgings of the plainest kind, sexes apart. Also free medi 
cal attention and medicines, and as many things free as possible, 
but under advices as to what and when. 

But this subject runs into that about the Punishment-Cities, 
which are to be considered under the head of Government. The 
chief difference is, that criminals and all who cannot pretty fully 
clear themselves of suspicion of felony and similar offences, 
should be carefully and thoroughly excluded, even from occasional 
entrance anywhere within the bounds of these "fallen districts;" 
The entire separation of professional criminals from openly fallen 
women, is one of the only means of either, detecting, punishing, 
or preventing general crimes; as well as a necessary means of 
preserving or restoring the women and their children. Nor is it 
socially just, to confuse the open sexual immorality of women, 
with the secret crimes of felony. And as to the 'deeper moral 
and religious questions involved, this is not the part of the sci 
ence in which to consider them. 

214 BK - n. PRECINCT, in. i. 




It seems an appropriate method whereby to conclude both this 
whole article on the Precinct, and also this part about the rela 
tions of states and cities to Corporations, to introduce a topic, 
which although entirely different from either of them, and from 
our whole theory of the Precinct, yet nevertheless has no other 
so proper a place in the work, and yet has much intrinsic and 
PRACTICAL importance, namely, the- topic of how far, and by 
what principles, the general advantages of our theory of the 
Precinct, could be realized by one or more Precincts, by means 
of charters merely, and not upon grounds of general rights ; and 
without an alteration of the constitution of the Nation, although 
they might involve an alteration of the constitution of the par 
ticular state. Because, there are late decisions in Pennsylvania, 
that "the state legislature cannot delegate to the people the 
power to enact laws." But of course this is only a dodge of the 
" legists" for the charters of all boroughs and cities, involve the 
right of those corporations to make certain kinds of laws. And 
if they can delegate to the borough, why not also delegate to the 
people of a " ward" ? 

This topic to be sure, might be postponed to CORPORATION. 
If so, it would come under the head of corporations exercising 
governmental and political functions; and under the lower or 
derivative order, exercising functions under present govern 
ments, and under the subdivision, for general functions. But 
the reservation of this topic to that element of society, would in 
terfere too much with the very general abstract and theoretical 
mode of thought there pursued. 

In general we may remark, that persons who cannot receive 
the PRECiNCT-theory in the fullness of foundation we give to it, 
may probably be able to admit the rights, as grants from a supe 
rior power. This would be, in effect, to rank Precincts as Corpo 
rations, in which case, nearly our whole argument on freedom of 
Corporations, would become a part of the Precinct argument, and 


would counterbalance, by extent, what was lost in the depth, of 
the foundation. But we have aimed to place the rights of Pre 
cincts upon more durable reasons, regarding as we do, Precincts 
to be spontaneous and instinctive units of society, with inaliena 
ble rights, concurrent with the rights of all the other units, Indi 
vidual, Family, Nation, <fcc. But after all, it is not so important 
now, and practically, what grounds we place the rights upon, as 
it is, how Extensive we will grant those rights shall be. 


The simplest and best method would be, by charters from the 
Nation itself. But this could not be constitutionally effective 
within the limits of already existing and completed " states/ 7 un 
less by their consent. The general government alone, could only 
furnish such charters for its " territories," or such parts of them 
as it chose so to do. But of course, no such charter could convey 
any more power, than what the general government might convey 
to any other of its " new states." These powers would be more 
ample, however, than any yet conveyed to a new state. But no 
thoroughly ample grants could be given by charter, even by the 
Nation, without a previous alteration of ITS " constitution." 

In " old states," even granting ample charters to Precincts 
within them, considerable facilities would be obtained by the 
grant of charters from the general government also ; so that each 
Precinct would thus have two charters. 

If charters were given by the Nation, whether alone or con 
currently, the principles hereinafter mentioned, would most gen 
erally apply with equal suitability. 

There are some objects, which, for their complete attainment, 
or even for their satisfactory trial, would require the subsequent 
co-operation of the national government, for instance, Peace- 
Precincts. And the United States government should be peti 
tioned to excuse such Peace-Precincts from all military burdens, 
both personal and financial. The United States government should 
also be petitioned to confirm the relief of some of the Precincts, 
by amendments of the national constitution, so as to make their 
privileges more permanent, and their independence more real, 
somewhat like the Free Cities of Germany, which having been 
established even in the Middle Ages, still preserve their free- 


dom, and give us specimens of .the best, happiest, and most 
effectual governments in the world. 

Even Russia had granted such freedom many years ago, to a 
large peace settlement of protestant Mennonites ; but lately re 
voked it. This drove the Mennonites to emigrate to the United 
States, whereupon the Russian government restored the grant. 
But grants revocable at will, will not answer, nor anything less 
than irrevocable charters. Consequently the Russian Mennon 
ites still continue their emigration into this country. They are 
slightly communists, as they hold their pasture lands in com 
mon, and perhaps some other things. They had a difficulty in 
finding suitable lands. For the United States government, with 
its all extravagant waste of public lands, has no method it seems, 
to encourage settlements either in joint or in common ownership. 
It has lands for Mormons, and " squatters," and reservations for 
Indians, but not for communes, until paid for in severalty. 



Here we are to consider how near an approximation could be 
made to our Precinct-system, by any one " State/ 7 without any 
alteration either of the constitution or laws of the Nation. 

If nothing better nor more can be done, it would be something 
at least, if each state would give to its townships or smallest 
Precincts, at least the county powers of sheriffs, &c. Because, a 
very general and thorough diminution of the size of counties, 
even without any radical increase of the powers, would be a first 
step towards the proposed new order; yet as it would not pro 
vide compensations for removals, it would lack one of the ad 
vantages of the more radical plan. 

It is certain however, that any State might give to any one, or 
a few adjoining Precincts, a charter so as to embody the princi 
ples herein set forth, as an experiment. And the experiment 
might be made with such limitations, either of time or s|)ace, as 
would avoid running excessive risks by untried plans. 

Of course any change should be made gradually, and have a 
few years of notice, that all persons might remove to the dis 
trict of their choice, who were not satisfied with the ruling ma 
jorities or powers in their own Precinct. Another feature in 


the starting of this plan is, that no Precinct should be forced 
into this arrangement. But each one should have the choice, 
to take its Precinct-freedom, or to remain under the old state- 
machinery, as some perhaps would do at first; the main idea 
being, to increase freedom, not to diminish it. 


1. In General. 

In order to put the proposed theory in operation in the 
United States, it would not need to be adopted by the general 
government at first ; for it is practicable for each state itself to 
make an experimental approximation to the general idea. To pro 
duce this change, all that would be required would be, first,. for 
any state to adopt the constitution of the United States for its 
own state-constitution, substituting therein the words " state," or 
"each state," for "United States;" and "Governor" for "Presi 
dent;" and instead of "Governors," the word "Sheriffs:" also, 
to use some reasonable precaution against local oppression; and 
to make a few other verbal alterations which would obviously be 
necessary. And second, to provide by general law, to allow any 
city or borough which would accept the alteration, to accept the 
constitution of the United States, as its borough charter, with a 
few obvious and necessary restrictions; or the same might be 
granted to separate Precincts severally. And to make the matter 
more plain, the following suggestions are offered; showing how 
any one or more states might give to any one (or more) county 
or township within it, such an enlarged charter, as would enable 
any such Precinct to exercise generally the powers which the 
state itself now has, but with such exceptions as will presently 
be mentioned. Or the state, by general law, or alteration of its 
" constitution" affecting all its Precincts or townships, might so 
enact and provide. The idea is, that each Precinct should have 
the same powers in relation to the state, that each individual 
state now has, in relation to the Nation, under the constitution of 
the United States : with the exceptions now to be mentioned. 
2. Exceptions. 

The exceptions or reservations to the state, of its present 
powers, might all be comprised in general, under the following 
five classes. 


(a) Excepting: Limitations of Time. If the means whereby 
the change was effected, were charters incorporating Precincts, 
the charters need not be perpetual, but might be made either for 
a limited time, or else revocable at any time by a prescribed 
amount of majority of the voters of the state. But if the means 
were a general law, it would naturally be revocable by the state, 
the same as any other law ; nevertheless, some definite amount 
of majority should be prescribed, under which the law should 
not be revocable ; or rather, the means of the alteration should 
be what is commonly called an alteration of the constitution of 
the state. 

(b) Excepting : that no property-qualification should be re 
quired of voters, for any $tae-representative or officer. This 
exception is necessary to guard against anticipated logical objec 
tions, rather than to accomplish the general system of the theory. 

(c) Excepting: all matters relating to the government of the 
individual state in its totality, and in its relations to the Nation. 
For, its state government would need to be continued, both for the 
sake of its own general internal affairs, and also for the sake of 
its relations to the Nation. 

Of course, in our plan, when adopted by all the Precincts of 
any State, the old state-machinery would be largely reduced in 
number; and the business of those officers that remained, would 
also be vastly reduced. The only absolute necessity for retaining 
the state-organization at all, would be to maintain and fulfill its 
relations to the general government, that is the Nation. But if 
the main object cannot be accomplished throughout a whole state, 
and if only a few scattered Precincts, or perhaps only one, could 
get such a charter, then, instead of adjoining Precincts in every 
Amalgam, having equal power in the election of the Precincts' 
officers, the state itself might have to retain those powers also. 

(d) Excepting : those few particulars wherein our proposed 
system differs essentially from that of the United States, in the 
apportionment of powers. These items have been already men 
tioned in a former part of this article, where we drew a com 
parison between the two systems. Accordingly, the state might 
give by charter to its individual Precincts, and to their Amal 
gams, all the rights which itself possessed ..; but it could not give 
those which the Nation ought to give : and it would be folly for 


it to give to the Nation, the rights which, under a perfect system, 
should return to the Nation, because there are other rights which 
ought then to be returned from the Ration to the Precinct, which 
yet the state has no power to take. Hence, the rights which, in 
the former comparison were assigned to the Nation, should be 
retained by the states, under the plan of state-corporations here 
suggested; otherwise the Nation would or might acquire more 
than its share of power in the alteration. 

(e) Excepting : all aifairs and officers having relations to, and 
representatives to or in, the government of the United States. 
No alterations of these relations and officers can be made, without 
the consent of the United States government. That, although 
desirable, has already been considered. But it would be a higher 
alteration than we are now considering, as required by the very 
nature of the plan by state-corporations, and for separate state- 



A still better method of charter, (for experiment) than the 
adaptation of the constitution of the United States, would be, 
to grant a charter expressing directly, a complete but brief out 
line of what the Precinct rights ought to be, with the usual 
reservation, "so far as the same does not conflict with the con 
stitution or laws of the United States." A form of charter of 
this kind, adopted by any state subdividing itself into small 
localities, and by amendment to its state constitution, would 
aiford the most direct and most satisfactory experiment that is 
possible, without the direct co-operation of the Nation revising 
its own constitution. 

AYhat would be wanted would be, not a huge volume ot 
interminable details; but a real "magna charta," a simple "bill 
of rights," a charter with little words, but big ideas. 

However, this whole subject of chartering Precincts by 
"States," is only incidental, and is no essential part of the 
theory of the Precinct. 

In conclusion. We now leave this theory to the reader's 
careful consideration; if it shall seem to him to deserve it. 





THE Nation is the FIFTH Unit or fundamental Element of 
society, as determined in our Analytics. So much however, is 
said of this topic by other writers, that comparatively little 
remains for us. And according to our theory, its proportionate 
importance is over-estimated by most other writers. In a true 
analysis, some part of what is usually attributed to it belongs to 
Mankind, and another part belongs to Precinct, and another to 
Corporation ; so that only a fourth, is its real place. We have 
Precinct on the one side, Corporation on the other, and Man 
kind above it. The internal affairs of Nation, we consider 
mostly under the heads of Precinct and Corporation and " Civil 
Government;" the higher external affairs we consider partly, 
under the head of Mankind, including Nation as of course one 
of its fundamental elements. Hence, in this article we have 
comparatively rather to consider the theoretically lower or inter 
mediate affairs, commonly called international law, but in a wider 
sense than usual. 

In fact, one of the great works which Social Science has to 
accomplish, is to analyze into its real elements, what is called 
" The .Law of Nations," and thus to appropriate to each depart 
ment, its appropriate share. For the custom has been, to collect 
under this term all the general principles of law, and even of 
human rights, which seem to have no more suitable place in the 
field of thought. Thus in the Roman law, the phrase, authority 
right or law, of Nations, (jus gentium), generally was used to 
express that sense of right which is common to most or to all 


men, and which is in conformity to common instinct and reason, 
and which is called by us the law of nature. Such a combina 
tion is all very well in an address by " counsel," but is not 
exactly the true course for a scientific work. The absolute law 
of right, the relative rights of established usage, the law of God, 
the modifications by voluntary contract, all ought to be some 
what considered, in the treatment of any branch of practical 
morals, or of applied law ; but yet, properly belong to a more 
general and higher department of thought, than any one of 
them. Thus also we may take Grotius' sources of international, 
and generalize them as the true foundations of all law, namely, 
nature's law, divine law, custom, and compact : and in both 
departments, custom and compact may be put together, and 
again generalized into, " Consent/ 7 as we do in II. I. 2, of this 

Interesting also are the questions, how far voluntary contracts 
or agreements modify, what otherwise would be natural laws, or 
God's law. For instance ; is it right to use explosive bullets in a 
war between Nations who agree to do so ? And is it right for 
human beings to marry for a limited time, even if they agree to 
do so ? And is it right for Nations or Individuals to lie, cheat 
and steal, even if all sides agree to do so? But .if not, then 
how would that decision affect the question of war at all, or of 
the methods of conducting war? But these questions belong 
rather to Moral Philosophy and to Theology. 

One of the evils of so confusing Law and Right in general, 
with international law, has been to pervert universal principles, 
partly in favor of war, and partly to indulge Nations with privi 
leges to do wrong. For, until the last few years, perhaps we 
may say until the work of Mr. Field, the law of Nations has 
been chiefly occupied with matters about war, providing for, or 
conducting, or concluding it. Thus, pharisaically strict rules of 
non-resistance, have been taught as if they were eternal princi 
ples obligatory on Individuals and Provinces &c. ; whilst war at 
the same time has been held forth, as if it were very wise and 
good between Nations; nay as if it were their most glorious 
achievement. Accordingly, the claims of Nation over Indi 
vidual, have been stretched to a tension beyond common sense, 
chiefly to justify the claims of Nations on their citizens, for war- 

222 BK - IIL NATIOX. i. i. 

services and for war-taxes, and for the forcible collection of ex 
cessive internal taxes even in time of peace. In fact, nearly all 
the old despotic notions about the divine right of kings, have 
passed down into modern Society, transmigrated into the idea of 
the divine and UNLIMITED right of Nation ; together with abso 
lution from all sin (in advance) or even the other royal doc 
trine transmigrated, namely, the Nation can do no wrong. In 
such a fog, there can neither be a true Moral Philosophy, nor a 
true Theology. 

The ready susceptibility of the usual ideas on the Law of 
Nations, to higher generalizations, will appear also from the 
follo.wing extract from Appletons' Cyclopedia, on this subject. 
"It was the object of Grotius to show that Nations are gov 
erned by a law distinct from the natural law, to wit, by a code 
or body of rules, founded indeed in the law of nature, but pro 
ceeding immediately from universal consent. ' Those right 
deductions/ he says, ( which proceed from the principles of 
reason, point to the law of nature, while those which proceed 
from common consent, proceed from the law of Nations.' Puf- 
fendorf rejected the distinction which Grotius had drawn, be 
tween the law of nature and the law of Nations; he denied 
that the latter was founded upon express consent, but considered 
it merely the law of nature applied to Nations." Both sides 
admitted, that, as "aggregate bodies of Individuals, Nations 
must be in some degree subject to the law of nature," from 
which we may, with Wolf and Hobbes, properly maintain " that, 
in their collective capacity, Nations acquire a new character and 
being, different from that of the Individuals of whom they are 
composed; therefore in its applications to societies of men, the 
law of nature must undergo some changes and modifications, 
and thus is derived the voluntary law of Nations." 

Thus do these writers dimly and confusedly anticipate the 
idea of Nation as a Great Social Unit ; but only of IT, ISOLATED, 
and not as one of several Units. But modern Science is disin 
tegrating these conglomerations, and out of them we may hope to 
see differentiated, three different degrees and grades of thought, 
and three different branches of study, namely ; One, of the 
Nation as one of the several Units of Society : The Second, 
The (higher or real) Law of Nations, that is, that law of nature, 


which consists of the principles which every civilized Nation is 
presupposed to hold in common, and to be applicable to affairs 
ivithin as well as outward of itself: And the Third, what is 
now called Law of Nations ; but which should then simply be 
called International Law. 


1. Eights in General. 

It is generally admitted, that in all their legitimate organiza 
tions Mankind have, in their collective capacities, rights which 
they do not possess as Individuals. This admission seems to 
be an indistinct anticipation, that society consists of a plurality 
of Units, each of which has its own peculiar rights. But un 
fortunately, those writers who have taken this ground in regard 
to Nations, have too much ignored the rights of citizens as 
Individuals and as Families, and of the other Units. These 
collective rights however, may be analyzed so as to be resolved 
into only two, namely, one, the right of many rather than of one 
person, that is to say, the right of numbers; and the other, 
which is better, the right of peculiar position or relation of 
any organization, person, or locality, which has claim when 
there is no alternative resource to it, for the maintenance of its 
rights in question, in any particular case^ 

Vattel, as quoted and referred to by Twiss, the standard Eng 
lish author on the Law of Nations, (in their Chaps. I.), says : 
( 4), "Nations being composed of men naturally free and inde 
pendent, and who, before the establishment of civil societies, 
lived together in the state of nature, Nations or sovereign 
states, are to be considered as so many free persons, living 
together in the state of nature." Again ( 5) " Men being sub 
ject to the laws of nature, and their union in civil society not 
being sufficient to free them from the obligation of observing 
these laws, since by this union they do not cease to be men ; the 
entire Nation, whose common will is only the result of the 
united wills of the citizens, remains subject to the laws of na 
ture, and is obliged to respect them, in all its proceedings. And 
since the law arises from the obligation, as we have just ob 
served ( 3), the Nation has also the same laws that nature has 

224 BK - IIL NATION. I. ii. 

given to men, for the performance of their duty." Again (10 
and 11): "The experience of communities * * * confirms 
what the instinct of the Individual-man suggests. There is 
accordingly, in human nature, a tendency towards society, and 
whenever opportunity presents itself, men are found to associate 
themselves together, for the purpose of mutually aiding and 
assisting one another. There thus grow up spontaneously, rela 
tions of natural society amongst men. The law of this natural 
society is, that each Individual" [whether person or Nation] 
" should do for the others, everything which their welfare re 
quires, and which he can perform without neglecting the duty 
which he owes to himself [or itself]: and this obligation of 
natural society is coextensive with the human race. The Uni 
versal Society of the human race, being thus an institution of 
nature, all men are bound to cultivate it, and to discharge its 
duties : and they cannot release themselves from that obligation, 
by any convention or private association." Vattel also ( 10) 
says, " a law which all men ought to observe, in order to live 
agreeably to their nature, and in conformity to the views of their 
common CREATOR." Mr. Twiss omits this latter part, but we 
are happy to find somebody saying something about the rights 
of the CREATOR, in relation to National duties and rights. We 
are also happy to hear about human race and human nature, in 
this connection. 

What Mulford says of the inviolability of the Individual 
and of the Nation, is equally true of the Family, the Precinct, 
and of all the other Units or " moral personalities" of society. 
Thus, p. 268, he says : " The conception which defines either 
the Nation or the Individual, as subordinate and secondary, is, 
in its error, the postulate of an inevitable antagonism. If 
either be held, not as an end in itself, but only as a means 
having the other for an end, there can be no principle of unity, 
and no form of reconciliation." And we affirm that the same 
may be also said of the relation of the Nation to the Family 
and to the Precinct, and to Mankind : and whether to the Social 
Circle or not, remains to be investigated. 

Accordingly however, we cheerfully admit the same rights to 
the Nation :' so that every Nation has a right to modify and 
limit the powers of the Precincts within it, so far as called for 


by its particular genius and mission, and to provide against the 
special dangers of its own time and position ; as against Turks, 
Barbarians, Aristocracies, Demagogeries &c. 

Writers generally, and Mulford also, include among the spe 
cial rights of the Nation, the following: (1) "The right of 
self-preservation ;" as if anything whatever could exist, without 
that right; and (2) "The right to declare war and conclude 
peace ;" as if everything that had a right to defend itself, did 
not also have that right ; and (3) " The right to form INTER- 
national relations ;" as if Individuals did not have the right to 
form inter-individual relations, and Families, inter-family rela 
tions, &c. and (4) " The right to coin money ;" as if the manu 
facture of money had not been already proved by Spencer and 
Mill, to be more safely bestowed upon Corporations, than aught 
otherwise ; and (5) " The right of Eminent Domain ;" as if 
Mankind itself had not superior right thereunto, which must 
some day be re-established, at least metaphysically and morally 

The right of the Nation over the domain, is the same as its 
right over persons, namely, a restricted one, limited in principle 
by the rights of all the other Units ; and limited in practice, only 
by the rights of superior powers when they shall normally arise. 
When the question comes up, of division of a Nation into two 
or more Nations, the subject of the rights of isolated or singular 
Precincts, has nothing particularly to do with it ; neither has the 
question of Eminent Domain. The question of Domain is in 
cluded, as a minor matter in that of subdivision of the Nation, 
and puts to rest all argumentation based upon property rights, 
just as a legitimate divorce a vinculo, allows not the usual claims 
on property, arising out of the marriage law, nor of arguments 
upon that ground. 

As was said in our Summary Introduction: every Unit, 
whether Individual, Family, Social Circle, Precinct, Nation or 
Mankind, has its own rights, which are inalienable, indefeasible, 
and indivisible. Therefore in general we may say, the sover 
eignty of the Nation over the Precincts within, and over rela 
tionships to other Nations and Mankind outward, is LIMITED 



226 BK - HI- NATION. I. II. 

Nevertheless, in cases of conflict of authority, or of differ 
ence of opinion between Precinct, (or other lesser unit,) and 
Nation, the former must of course yield to the latter. For, 
although in principle the Units are equal, Precinct, and so on, 
to Nation, yet in doubtful cases the practical decision must be 
allowed to the superior power. This has been shown in the 
Introduction, under the head of "Resemblances to Gravitation." 
Therefore all the lower ones must give way before the unions of 
many Nations, whenever such unions are formed ; but still, each 
retains its own share of eternal rights, inalienable and indefeasi 
ble, as any other of the elements. The lesser elements can not 
be deprived of their rights avowedly or upon principle, but only 
by mistake, or by the necessities of arriving at definite conclu 
sions. The case is somewhat the same as between man and wife ; 
both have equal rights ; yet as there must be somebody to decide 
in doubtful cases, that right is conceded to the man, but only to 
be exercised honestly and faithfully. 

Our doctrine as to the Rights of a Nation may be summed up 
thus : the sovereignty of the Nation consists, as to Precincts, 
Corporations, Individuals and Families, not in superior rights 
but in superior power; but with the right of judging in doubt 
ful cases of jurisdiction; and on the other hand, in reference 
to the Unit above it, namely, Mankind, the Nation has only its 
rights as one of the Essential Units, all being subject to their 
peculiar conditions of position and locality. 

These peculiar conditions of position however, are sometimes 
very important. Thus, a few miles of ocean near the land be 
longs to the Nation, not to the adjacent Precinct. So Mining 
Districts, also Large Cities, and what are called " States" (see 
Bk. II. Pt. II. Chaps. XI. and XII.) must hold a part, at least, 
of their rights, as fiefs of the Nation, and so far be in direct 
subjection to IT. 

The Nation, mainly, is the power of negation to the Precincts, 
just as Mankind is to the Nation. Yet the Precinct acts on all 
below or derivative from it, just as much positively as negatively. 
But the relation of these is sufficiently treated under Precinct, 
and need not be enlarged upon now. 

The rights of a Nation would be well set forth by Spencer's 
general theory of government, supposing the Nation first to have 


been subdivided into Precincts, and the Precincts to have had 
constitutionally granted to them, their real share of rights as set 
forth in our theory on that subject. But the theory of the do- 
nothing and no-power of government, is utterly untenable in any 
small government, or among any ordinary set of men living in 
close neighborhood. And the theory itself, as set forth by him, 
exhibits plainly the facts of its origin in a large strong and con 
solidated government over a free and practical people. It en 
deavors to maintain the consolidated nature of government, by 
entirely denying rights and duties that are absolutely essential to 
every small or immediate local government. In these respects 
Spencer's view is diametrically opposite to Comte's : so that each 
one's theory contains a large amount of truth and wisdom, when 
we know to what field to apply it. 

Inasmuch as Precinct is a Unit of society as truly as Nation, 
it follows that "the general principles of. nationality and inter- 
nationality, are applicable to Precinct, as truly as tp Nation, but 
in a less degree. Hence, the reader, in going through this 
part of the work, is requested to bear that relation in mind ; and 
to observe that we are pointing out principles that are equally 
as applicable to Precinct, but in a less degree, and in regard to a 
different class of affairs. Because Precincts bear the same rela 
tionship in form and law, to the Nation, that Nations bear in 
spirit to Mankind. And then again, the Precinct, being the 
next lower Unit to Nation, and being the only other one which 
is Local, and being with it also fundamentally a political Unit, 
is pre-eminently the type and guide for National arguments 
and National ideas. 

The rights and duties of the Nation, and indeed of any organ 
or department of Civil Government, in relation to the Individ 
ual, the Family, the Social Circle, the Precinct and the Corpo 
ration, are better considered under those five heads respectively, 
than in this place. But the best place to consider them, in our 
classification, is under our head CIVIL GOVERNMENT, in the 
SYNTHETICS ; under which head, controversies between Nation 
and particular Precincts should be provided for, whilst of a 
peaceful character. Controversies of a warlike nature, are pro 
vided for under Nation, in Birth and Size of Nations, and in 
Rebellions, which will be treated presently. The relations to 

228 BK - IIL NATION. I. II. 

Mankind will also be considered presently; next the general 
relations of one Nation to another, and to ITS citizens, namely, 
International Law; and afterwards the Doctrine of Naturali 

Some countries are cursed with a deficiency of nationality, 
and some with an excess of it. Guizot, (p. 309), speaking 
of Greek Civilization, says : " The Greek who carried the in 
dividual culture of man to so high a pitch, knew not how to 
establish the social relations on a solid basis, nor to organize 
a national body, nor to combine the peoples subjected to his 
influence, into a system of Nations strongly united together. I 
wish for no other proofs than that terrible Peloponnesian war, 
that fratricidal struggle, from which dates the decline of Greece, 
and the lamentable history of the Empire of Alexander and his 
successors." And we may add, that what distinguished the 
Peloponnesian war from the domestic war in the United States, 
was not only the length of time of the former, but also the fact 
that it was not so concluded as to settle any great principle, nor 
to establish any great policy. 

On the other hand, there is sometimes an excess of nation 
ality. Nationality is made the basis and instigation of most 
wars. The idea constitutes the strongest intrenchment and the 
highest glorification, for the hidden selfishness and the secret 
animosities of Mankind. Under its sacred veil, as also under 
the delusive garb of fanatical religions, human beings have, for 
ages, turned the worst passions of a fallen nature, into honorable 
and worshipful attributes. The time we hope must come, when 
patriotism as usually understood, rallying for one's country 
merely because it is one's OWN country, will be accounted with 
that narrow-minded selfishness, that rallies for section or party 
or society or Family or even person, because it is one's own. But 
the time has not yet come. It cannot come, unless on conditions 
of mutuality, and by or with new national brotherhood- views 
and feelings, in several of the leading Nations; and thus make 
a new clause in international law. It is the peculiar function 
of Christianity to cause this metaphysical organ, Patriotism, to be 
re-absorbed, and more and more to disappear from being an 
exclusive organ of nationality. This it does, partly by furnish 
ing a renewed spirit to Individuals, and partly by diverting 


a portion of the vitality of patriotism, to other elements, say- 
to Precincts, Corporations, and Mankind. 

2. Duties of Progress. 

Here; just between the general rights of the Nation, in regard 
to all the other elements of Social Science, and the special and 
superior rights of Mankind, may be placed, as partaking partly 
of the nature of both of those departments, the present topic, 
namely, the duties of a Nation to progress; and especially not to 
retrograde : for these are duties which it owes alike to all the 
Individuals, Families, and other internal elements which it con 
tains ; as well as to all its surrounding and related Nations. 

For instance. If any serious attempt were made to reinstate 
slavery in the United States, it would arouse a universal cry of 
horror throughout the civilized world : and would probably soon 
lead to a great war ; foreign Nations also joining in it, for the 
sake of mingled -policy and humanity. 

The interventions of civilized Nations, in the affairs of the un 
civilized, and semi-civilized, are justifiable rather upon grounds 
of the uncivilized tending to retrogression, than upon any other 
grounds. For, when the less civilized ones come into frequent 
intercourse with the more civilized, the former lose their bar 
barian virtues, and retrograde, unless they adopt our higher de 
velopments and thus progress. This explains the European 
interventions in Asiatic affairs, as of Turkey, China, &c., and 
also in African affairs. The justification is, their aim to check 
slavery, to check despotism, now being used chiefly to prop up 
their falling religions, and to check their general retrogression 
towards barbarism. 

These also are the real reasons which justify most of the usual 
protectorates, and armed interventions, of some Nations, in favor 
of others. These are the reasons which justify the protectorate 
of Europe over Greece, and of the United States over Mexico, 
and over various other American states ; namely the protectorate 
which is embodied in the Monroe-doctrine. 

Very different justifications are of course generally alleged, 
and often believed in : and especially often is alleged the old 
doctrine about "Balance of Power." But if this were the 
chief reason, it would be expressed in a claim to force all 
Nations to modify themselves, so as to become as nearly equal 

230 BK - IIL NATIOX. I. ii. 

in size and strength, as human Individuals, or Families are, 
each to each. The demand for retaining the balance of power, 
when there is NO balance, must necessarily mean merely a de 
mand that no one shall increase itself, or its influence : but that 
absurdity has never been attempted. The real chief reason, 
more probably has been, that the grasping Nations were the 
physical ones, the least civilized of Europe, and were tending to 
retrogression, and to forcing that retrogression upon other Na 
tions. In regard to this subject, Wheaton 62, says, " ques 
tions of the greatest difficulty arise, which belong rather to the 
Science of Politics than of public law," (that is, they belong 
especially to our Department, namely, Social Science). And 
again, 63, "Encroachment * * * overt acts * * * ambitious 
purpose/ 7 &c. " Such were the grounds of the confederacies 
created, and the wars undertaken, to check the aggrandizement 
of Spain, and the house of Austria, under Charles V. and his 
successors;" But everybody knows the really retrograde moral 
and religious impetus, which was the most active and most 
dreaded element of those wars. Thus again Wheaton 63, 
says, " The repeated interference of Austria and Spain, in favor 
of the Catholic faction in France, Germany, and England; and of 
the Protestant powers to protect their persecuted brethren in Ger 
many, France, and the Netherlands, gave a peculiar coloring to the 
political transactions of the age." We may also add, that the same 
principles underlaid and justified Cromwell's European policy. 

But it is not hereby assumed, nor is it necessary to prove, that 
the real grounds for foreign intervention, were always justifiable, 
nor always consisted of sound principles in Ethics, or in Theol 
ogy. All that is necessary to assert is, that the peoples believed 
them so to be ; or thought there was some reasonable probability 
that they did so consist. For instance, referring to the French 
revolution of '89 ; Wheaton 64, says, " The successive coali 
tions formed by the great European monarchies, against France, 
subsequent to her first revolution in 1789, were avowedly de 
signed to check the progress of her REVOLUTIONARY PRINCI 
PLES, and her military power." And we add that there would 
have been little reason to fear or check that military power, had 
it not been really and chiefly animated by the desire, to spread 
throughout Europe, those revolutionary principles, which out of 


France and at that time, were generally believed to be ruinous 
to all interested, sovereigns and peoples alike. 

And so, in regard to the British Opium- War in China ; and 
to her wars in India. The British and other commercial peoples 
thought, that the progress of commerce forbade such retrograde 
policies as China and India were constantly inclined to follow. 
But in Japan, and the Sandwich Islands, and elsewhere, wjiere 
the native policy has been persistently progressive, and seeking 
to catch up with the civilization of the age, no wars have been 

Poland was partitioned, really because it had an active tend 
ency to retrograde towards barbarism. 

Ireland was conquered by, and has still to be retained under 
special control by England, chiefly because it had and still has, 
the same retrogressive tendency. 

Bismark's policy, although subversive of the old talk about 
" Balance of Power/ 7 has been sustained by the sympathies of 
the most advanced Nations of the world ; because his policy is 
abreast of this age of progress. But he is overdoing the central 
izing work, and is subverting the Precincts of which Germany 
consists, and which have been the bulwark of freedom and 
thought, for ages. And therein lies his danger. Yet still per- 

O * O O XT 

haps those who have a nearer, and inside view of the threatening 
dangers, may know that his policy of centralization is necessary 
temporarily. " And necessity knows no law." 

All the great powers of Europe, have acquired accessions of 
territory during the last century, at times, without producing 
serious objections, or war; particularly and lately, France, 
Italy, Germany, and Russia. The great war against Russia 
(about Turkey), was partaken in only by England and France, 
and by them chiefly because they really coveted various parts of 
the Turkish dominions for themselves: and as one incidental 
reason, because those dominions contain Palestine ; for the old 
hankering for Palestine, which kept up the great Crusades for 
several centuries, is not entirely dead yet. Moreover Russia 
baffles England in India ; and is so much greater than any of 
the other powers, that they naturally may have special fears 
from her. And the ruling dynasty in France, sometimes en 
gages in foreign war, to entertain and divert her people at home. 

232 BK - IIL NATION, i. ii. 

But no Nation has ever thought of warring against Russia 
merely because of her immensity, although one fifteenth of the 
population of the Earth : nor against China, for that reason, 
although being one third of the Earth's population. Russia, 
although warlike, is progressive and emancipatory. She has 
neither needed a great war, to bring her to her senses; nor ex 
hibited general enormities arousing the sympathies of the civil 
ized world against her. She also allows great freedom to her 
Precincts. But the time may come, when the Nations will fear 
her: yet the first Napoleon's prophecy was so premature, as to 
be almost absurd : for he thought nothing about the great func 
tions of her Precincts because Precincts make a weak govern 
ment for aggression ; although a strong one for defence. 

The principles elucidated in all this 2, ought to aid in 
forming a right idea about the present affairs of Spain. Spain 
became a Republic, wise, peaceable, not disturbing other Na 
tions, and attending well to her own affairs. But a reaction has 
come. The Republic has gone down. And now the question is, 
shall the thousands of Individuals and Families and Precincts, of 
Spain, who have learned what civil, moral, and religious liber 
ties are, be forced back against their enlightened consciences, into 
a darkness and servility that would now render them miserable? 

Rights once given should not be taken away. The first and 
eternally right plan, therefore, is to adopt a true Precinct- 
system ; and thus to allow the citizens of all the various dif 
ferent opinions, religious and political, to arrange themselves 
spontaneously, into the political and religious associations that, 
they conscientiously believe will make them happy. And the 
Nation itself should pay the expenses of their removals, thus 
made necessary by its own changeable policy. But if the 
Nation will not do that ; nor even allow the people to rearrange 
themselves into their own Precincts at their own expense (which 
doubtless they would only be too glad to do), then somebody 
or something may be held accountable for such tyranny and op 
pression. Shall the accountable thing be held to be the Form of 
the Civil Government ; or the Religion ? 

If the form of government is to be held accountable, then all 
the monarchies of Europe are interested, and have right to inter 
vene, in some manner, to rescue their own form of government, 


from such disgrace. If the religion is to be held accountable, 
then all the liberal Catholics of the world, are interested to rescue 
their religion from such disgrace : and the unrelenting Catholics, 
with the dark-age spirit, if there be any such in these days, and 
if they aid and encourage such unlimited retrogression, should 
be held morally accountable ; and might be denied what would 
otherwise be their religious powers in other countries. How can 
Catholics ask for division of school funds in Protestant coun 
tries, when the countries of their own faith, drive out and per 
secute Protestants; and if, as by our supposition above, it is not 
the Civil Government that is to be held accountable, but only 
the religion ? The Catholic church is a world- wide CORPORA 
TION, and as such can be held accountable for its doings, when 
it is admitted that the affairs are its doings : just as truly as any 
Nation can be held accountable. 

But however little or much that Corporation is to be held ac 
countable for the retrogressions in Spain, that does not exculpate 
the Civil Government thereof: because that is the Arm of power 
which is actually doing and executing all this mischief. Gov 
ernments therefore have a right to urge on Spain, the establish 
ment of some humane relief: and first of all, some true system 
of Precincts, as may be most according to her own peculiar 
nationality. Or does the right of other Nations to intervene, 
consist only and selfishly in the measure of danger which they 
can perceive to threaten themselves, by or from the reaction? 
The smothered cry of the most advanced peoples of the world, 
is, that the reaction and retrogression ought to be limited and 
restrained, by the importunities, the protests, the non-intercourse, 
and if need be, by the arms of those who believe in war, of the 
free peoples of the world. 

The only other alternative, and the least that the rights of the 
human race, Mankind, or human nature, can demand, is, that 
Spain should allow all her dissentient citizens, a free emigration, 
after plenty of time to dispose of their property ; and further 
more, that Spain will pay the expenses of their migration, and 
all reasonable charges and damages for the injury her policy is 
doing to them. In other words, the least that can be demanded 
for those oppressed by a Nation, is about what should be de 
manded for the oppressed of a Precinct ; but also a little more ; 

234 BK - IIL NATION, i. 11. 

namely, damages, because an emigration entirely from one's native 
country, is a much greater damage, injury, and unhappiness, 
than merely from one's Precinct. 

3. Rights in Relation to Mankind. 

No position can be more untenable, than the claim for immu 
nity of individual Nations, which some writers advocate. If 
any Nation, abounding in coal or iron, or other necessary article; 
possessing superabundance of wealth, with "interest" at very 
low rates, with labor unemployed or doubly taxed; leading the 
fashions of the world with extravagant and constant fluctua 
tions, so that nothing but swift transportation would answer 
for any commodities, if any such Nation should arise and fall 
under the combined control of its shipping and mining capital 
ists, the result would be long continued and fearful waste to the 
world, of the limited commodities, iron and coal. At the same 
time, the iron-working people of that Nation, owning no land, 
and at the mercy of the combination, might be grossly demoral 
ized in general, and finally forced to emigrate to other countries. 
In such a case, the right of Mankind to intervene cannot be 
disputed, if they know not better than by war, then by war, 
if they know better, then by legislation, and discriminations, 
laid directly against the offending, Nation, its trade, its literature 
and its emigration. 

Or, again : if any Nation should persist in maintaining im 
mense standing armies, after all other Nations wished to dis 
arm, such persistence would force all the neighboring Nations, 
either, to continue to maintain all their armies idly, or else to 
discriminate by legislation, and perhaps finally to use their 
armies once for all, effectually, on the warlike nuisance whose 
, threatening attitude persisted in retarding the civilization and 
peace of the world. 

The rights which. Nation once had as the representative of 
Mankind, are passing away to empires and confederacies. But 
these latter cannot, according to our theory, be permanent, be 
cause the next and only Unit above them is Mankind ; nor can 
they eventuate in an organization of Mankind into ONE perma 
nent government; because that is the function of Jesus Christ 
only, for His visible return and reign oit earth. And the idea 
of one confederation of compulsory government for all Nations, 


previous to His reign, seems to us even more chimerical than 
the idea of one consolidated church ; because the church is an 
organ of only one class of interests and feelings, but Civil Gov 
ernment is an organ of all classes of interests and feelings. 

It was a bold thought of Charles Goepp in his essay headed 
"E pluribus unum," that this United-States-Government 
would one day embrace all the Nations of the earth. This 
thought, although not admissible in that application, is well 
worth considering in the principle. But as to the confederability 
of all the world in one representative body, IF it could be 
shown to be practicable, it would do something toward showing 
that a confederation thereof is natural and probable. And from 
this difficulty we may infer that confederations are not to be 
permanent, but only transitional to the higher Unity. And 
there might be a number of world-wide conventions which 
would represent various Corporations for various interests ; but 
hardly any one Civil Government especially for Localities. 

Of the various grades of government possible, the following 
calculation of maximums is suggested. Assuming, as we have 
elsewhere done, that 2500 is the largest number of persons that 
can properly and conveniently assemble for the performance of 
political functions, whether for primary voting, or for represent 
ative legislation ; and supposing that number to be the highest 
that can conveniently do the primary voting in a Precinct of 
thirty thousand inhabitants, that is to say, supposing twelve 
persons to each voter, then we would have the following series : 

Precinct, Population, - - - - 30,000 

Nation, ------- 75,000,000 

Third Grade, - - - - 187,500,000,000 

Fourth Grade, - - 486,750,000,000,000 

The second grade here, gives the highest maximum desirable 
for any Nation. The third grade here, would be able to an 
swer for the political organization or confederation of the whole 
Earth, with a population of 4J Individuals per acre of the land 
(exclusive of the waters); and that is a density about as great- 
as can possibly subsist upon it, by any known methods. The 
fourth grade would represent a population of 11,000 per acre, or 
2 persons of the present size to a square yard, of land ; that is to 
say, only just room for all to lie down on. 

236 BK. HI- NATION. I. III. 

Any Nation, being resolved into the higher kinds of political 
Corporations, and supposing the Corporations within the Pre 
cincts, to be transposable into four uniform and homogeneous 
classes, would be susceptible of four times the population above 
given, namely 300 Million, or one-fourth the present world ; and 
the Third Grade would represent a population of 18 to the acre. 

On the other hand, some writers think that an assembly ought 
not to consist of more persons than can meet together and con 
verse, without straining either the voice in speaking, or the ear 
in hearing ; say 300 persons each. Then the grades would be 
thus. First grade 3600 population. Second grade 1,080,000. 
Third grade 324,000,000. Fourth grade 97,200,000,000. Thus 
the fourth grade would be about half as much as the third grade, 
on the first named supposition. And the introduction of homo 
geneous Corporations would proportionally increase the possible 


1. Right to form Confederations. 

The whole subject of confederations is generally placed as a 
part of international law ; but the position most of it occupies 
in relation to our Unit, Mankind, requires us to locate most 
of it here. Nationality is the only elementary civil and state 
power, that as yet has represented, or can represent directly, the 
interests of Mankind. But, up to this time, Nationality, through 
international law, has not been much exercised in that use, be 
yond the matter of lessening wars, and promoting commerce in 
physical things. The true representative of Mankind, at pres 
ent, is Confederation. But this is only temporary, and transi 
tional to something higher ; moreover, confederations themselves 
are not permanent, as Nations are, nor as Mankind (metaphys 
ically speaking) is conceived as being. 

Confederations between Nations may be defined to be, the 
ASPIRATIONS of Mankind toward political unity, toward one 
law and one government. And international law is the legal 
expression of some of those aspirations. 

What directly and practically distinguishes a Nation, (even 
when organized into military Precincts or feudal system), from 
a Confederation, is, that the latter acts on the people only 


THROUGH its constituent local parts, namely, through the Na 
tions, but the Nation acts on its people directly, as truly as the 
Precincts do, because it is an instinctive Unit as well as they. 

A combination of two or more Nations into one, with the 
INTENTION or desire of being PERMANENT, constitutes a con 
federacy (or confederation) : and if the confederacy is to be gov 
erned by a hereditary monarch, it is called an Empire. Mr. 
Mulford (in " The Nation,") regards a confederacy as consisting 
of a union between "commonwealths" [or Precincts] only; ig 
noring the fact that a confederacy is based upon the assumption 
that its component commonwealths are independent states, and 
therefore are self-dependent Nations, in principle; and it ex 
pressly disavows the idea of the confederacy itself being the 
Nation. Confederacies therefore commit the equally great mis 
take, of establishing a theory of government upon one unit or 
one integer only, and ignoring an equally important unit. We 
have the Confederacy ignoring Nation, and Mulford ignoring 
Precinct. Mr. Mulford also argues against the right of real 
Nations to form confederacies. This he argues by confusing 
confederacy with Empire, and arguing against the advantages 
of unions, because the government of such unions has usually 
been hereditary and vested in an Emperor. 

Our argument here however, does not fully discuss the merits 
of the question, of the right or expediency of Nations to form 
confederacies; but merely discusses that confusion which only 
conceives of a union between Nations, as an Empire, overlook 
ing the possibility of such a union being a popular and elective 
government. And it is the confusion consequent therefrom, of 
applying the word confederacy, to a union between Precincts 
only, to which we are now objecting. Mr. Mulford's book is a 
lamentable instance of great principles of eternal truth, being 
deflected, in order to apply to the narrow exigencies of some one 
good cause of a good cause, namely, the nationality of the 
United States, upholding it by fearful perversions of funda 
mental social principles. Although his book is in many respects, 
a highly valuable one, and has done good service in a good cause. 

Mr. Mulford has an indistinct apprehension of the growth of 
the international confederative power, when (p. 254) he says : 
" Since the Nation has its vocation in a moral order, and its end 

238 BK - IIL NATION. I. in. 

in the realization of the destination of humanity in history; the 
Nations exist in an international relation, which has for its con 
dition a moral relation ; and the system of international laws is 
definitive of the moral order in which these relations come forth. 
The Nations, in the attainment of their necessary end, are con 
stituted in a moral order. They cannot therefore, in the de 
velopment of national life, remain in isolation and indifference. 
* * * As the relations consist in the moral order of history, their 
ampler expression will come, in the higher realization of the 
being of the Nation, in the moral order of history. * * * 
And as the Nation advances in the realization of its being, the 
science which has for its province the definition of the law of 
international relations, will become constantly the expression of 
a development in wider and more varied relations." 

Again, (p. 256), he says : " In the realization of the being of 
the Nation in history, there will be manifest among Nations a 
deeper relationship. * * * It is therefore no dream, but the 
coming of a new life, which holds the prophecy and the realiza 
tion of the fraternity of Nations. In the development of his 
tory, this relation is becoming more perfectly apprehended ; and 
as Mankind recognizes more deeply the universal fatherhood, 
there is manifested in the Christendom of Nations, the Family 
of Nations." 

Some of the foregoing phrases, as, "vocation in a moral order," 
" moral order of history," " attainment of their necessary end," 
" expression of development," " fraternity of Nations," " Family 
of Nations," are pretty much all we could ask either for Nations, 
or for Precincts; and show the common or similar relations 
between them ; and that the same may be represented in inter 
national law, as we said under Precinct. 

The true doctrine is, that the right of Nations to form moral 
and useful confederacies, is as eternal as the right of Individuals 
to enter into partnerships ; but the confederacies themselves 
are not eternal in their nature ; for, if they were permanent in 
their nature, and permanently voluntary, they would cease to be 
called confederacies, but would really be Nations, and be called so. 
Because Confederations, Leagues and Empires, bear the same 
relation to the particular Nations of which they consist, as the 
Amalgams of neighboring Precincts, bear to the particular Pre- 


cincts which compose them. The principles of this relation are 
treated under the head of Precinct. But Nations cannot be 
admitted to be capable of forming themselves into Corporations, 
nor vice-versa; because they are not elements of the Tribe- 

By the term confederacies here, we of course understand, not 
confederacies between " States" or parts of a Nation, but between 
separate Nations. And our American states are shown by us, 
under Precinct, to be only a kind of higher Corporations, with 
double charters, one, from the Precincts of which they are 
composed, and the other from the Nation. 

2. Uses of Confederations. 

Nothing but confederation between the common sized Nations, 
can be any balance at all against the rising power of the empires. 
There is the Chinese Empire, containing J of the population of 
the globe ; and there is the Russian Empire, containing nearly T V 
of the population, and y of the land of the globe. The power 
of such Nations, sometime will and must be felt disproportion 
ately pre-eminent over all others, taken singly, or connected by 
only temporary and fluctuating combinations. 

The trouble in empires, confederacies, and "unions" of dif 
ferent Nations, is, the attempt to make the fundamental constitu 
tions of their parts, that is Nations, uniform. But, as Humboldt 
in his latest days said, " to elevate the constitution of one Nation 
to the rank of an ideal, is to ignore the necessary historical modi 
fications, and, to a certain extent, to call in question the impor 
tance of the peculiar development of every nationality. The 
English constitution especially, with all the conspicuous elements 
of freedom, which it may embody, is still essentially an insular, 
oceanic product, which can be only partially imitated by the 
Continental States, which are rather of volcanic origin." 

One of the principal wants of modern times, is an interna 
tional congress for the great and especial purpose of preserving the 
peace of Nations, and also for marine law, and for international 
affairs not otherwise agreed upon between any particular Nations. 

The balance-of-power theory, was not anything better than an 
exhibition of instinctive fear against changes that necessarily are 
always being made, and so, was only a promoter of war. But 
it answered a temporary purpose, as an excuse, until men could 

240 BK - IIL NATION, i m 

see a better, for refraining from religious waie,, Aiid as a Jefence 
against wars for increase of territory. Yet ii could *iot con 
tinue. But now, by constituting a world's congifcris, or one 
special organ for this one function alone, we reach A higher step 
in living civilization, and insure its greater success. As such a 
congress would depend, for the execution of its decisions, partly 
on their moral effect, all sagacity should be employed for its 
constitution. This sagacity will exhibit itself in relying, not 
on the form of selection, but on securing a fair representation 
of the real and actual powers of the world, or of its leading 
Nations, at the time. But it need not depend only on its moral 
power, nor even chiefly thereon, but may easily find a ready 
method for the enforcement of its decisions, without war. Decla 
ration of partial or complete non-intercourse with those Nations 
who would actually resort to war, instead of submit to the 
congress's decisions, would soon bring the offenders to terms. 
This is the method which the congress of the United States so 
successfully used, instead of war, to bring Rhode Island into the 
Union, at the adoption of the constitution. In fact, non-inter 
course is the usual resort of educated and refined society, towards 
bullies and fighters. We find it successful in Precinct and in 
Corporation government, as well as in that of Individuals. 

As to the question whether such a congress ought to be per 
manent, intermittent, or remittent, whether it ought to abide 
always in session, or only at intervals ; and if the latter, whether 
the intervals should be regular; or whether it ought to be as 
sembled only upon requisite occasions, these are questions not 
essential to be settled at the first. 

Perhaps still another plan might be employed for some pur 
poses, namely, a st nding committee to act in the interim of the 
sessions, with some limited powers, and especially the power of 
convening the congress upon requisite occasions. For, of course 
it would not be safe to entrust the decisions of disputed interna 
tional questions for irrimediate action, to any ordinary committee 
of such a congress. Such a standing committee with limited 
powers, is a constituent of some of the most perfectly organized 
churches. And in this matter we see another instance where 
the world might learn from the churches, even as to mere forms 
of government. 



The intercourse between Nations must vary according to their 
many essential differences. The greater difference which distance 
ought to make, is evident in this, that a Nation is bound to pre 
vent, and may be held responsible for, incursions made from the 
borders of its own territory, into a foreign one immediately 
adjoining: but as to miscellaneous expeditions against distant 
countries, no Nation can be expected to do any thing more, 
than merely to use reasonable endeavors to prevent them. " Love 
thy neighbor as thyself" applies to Nations as well as to Indi 

It can hardly be doubted, that distance, either as to space or 
as to civilization, requires a different set of international laws 
for persons nearest, than for those farthest off; just as our theory 
of Precincts has special regulations for those Precincts that are 
immediately contiguous. But such differences of international 
law, could only be made by treaties; and such treaties, oft re 
peated and long continued, would naturally become leagues, and 
these in time, confederations, especially where the Nations were 

Nations, as well as Precincts, tend ultimately to form each its 
own particular character; and LIKES flock together, "likes" 
that is, inward resemblances, although perhaps outward con 

As it is the tendency, that all the persons of a Family should 
gradually become assimilated, and like to each other, so also all 
the Individuals and Families of any society, are tending to 
become alike. So also, all the Individuals, Families and com 
panies of a Nation, have a tendency to become more alike, 
Individual to Individual, Corporation to Corporation, and Pre 
cinct to Precinct. Even the social sets which are organized 
purposely to express differences, gradually take the same out 
ward resemblances of customs, &c., as far as means will permit. 
Furthermore, all the Nations of the world having commerce 
and intercourse, also are tending to resemblance or uniformity 
in their outward forms. 

Through all this outward uniformity, we find that the strongei 
law, is an inward law, that likes flock together with like that 


242 BK - m - NATION. I. v. 

Families tend to express one spirit, and draw together those 
who are similar. So also with Precincts, companies and social 
sets. So also with Nations; and in the t course of time, and 
with free travel, immigration and emigration, this segregation 
may be expected to continue, until all the communicating Nations 
of the earth, will become possessed more and more fully and 
firmly, each of its own peculiar life and inward character. Thus 
it is, that real heterogeneity develops out of homogeneity, as time 

In ancient times and among barbarians, the special national 
characteristics were formed by isolation and barbarism. And in 
modern times, AVC see each Nation forming its own peculiar 
national character, by the very opposite means, namely, by inter 
course and civilization. In ancient times, the outward circum 
stances were mostly different, but the inward spirit mostly the 
same. In modern times, the outward circumstances, all those 
things which can be seen, imitated and learned by rote, or by 
diagrams and models, are being imitated; and the Nations are 
thus becoming alike. But in the inward things of the heart, 
Nations as well as companies, social sets and Individuals, will 
become more and more unlike some others, and must be more 
and more attracted to those with whom they most sympathize. 
In some Nations, where the spirit of love and mutual regard 
for each other's rights, exist, much happy communism may de 
velop ; whilst in those Nations, and peoples who are clamoring 
for equality and fraternity, violating the relative duties of 
station ability and age, and puffing themselves up with pride 
and self-will, their desired communism and equality will not 
come; but instead thereof, all the vice and luxury that dis 
honest wealth can buy, after honest wealth is driven away ; and 
all the results of refined enmities, when the peace men and the 
unimpeachable citizens, are driven, either into obscurity, or 
into foreign lands. The example of France is a warning to 


No definition of the Nation can be accepted, which denies 
that " God hath made of one" continuous " blood," at least many 
"Nations of men," (Acts xvii. 26.) But some writers have 
carried out the radicalness of the idea of Nation, to the extent of 



supposing that nearly all of the many great Nations of Man 
kind, are indigenous, spontaneous developments, from the regions 
they inhabit; without allowing- for the facility with which men 
change their abodes, and commingle nationalities; a facility 
which is well known in history, as well as on reflection might 
be expected. Even if we admit more than one original or spon 
taneous race, still under no supposable theory, can there be ad 
mitted to be more than three, or at most five, such original or 
spontaneous races. 

Let us give here (chiefly from Twiss, vol. i. pp. 2 and 3), a 
definition of a Nation (People, or State) which has an inter 
esting history attached to it. Coming from Scipio Africanus, it 
is first quoted by Cicero (De Republica, i. 25.) This work, the 
" De Republica," was lost in antiquity, to the great regret of 
scholars and statesmen. But the definition therein, of a State, 
was preserved and transmitted by St. Augustine, in his great 
work, " The City of God." Indeed, those best able to judge, 
(including Cardinal Mai,) think that St. Augustine derived his 
first suggestions for his " City of God," from reading Cicero's 
" De Republics." From St. Augustine, Grotius derived the defi 
nition we are speaking of. And now at last Cardinal Mai has 
found and deciphered from an old Palimpsest, a large part of the 
identical old Ciceronian " De Republics ;" and among the saved 
fragments of which, is this very definition we are now to give. 

Cicero gives it thus : " Therefore said Africanus, Public affairs 
are the affairs of the People ; but not every collection (coetus) 
of men, however congregated, (or aggregated), is a people ; but 
the collection (coetus) of the multitude, associated by consent of 
justice (juris, right, or law), and in the (communione) communism 
(fellowship) of utility." 

St. Augustine adds : " Therefore surely, where that righteous 
ness or right-ness (justitia), is not, there the collection of men is 
not associated by the consent of justice (juris, right, or law), nor 
in the (communione) communism (fellowship) of utility." (City 
of God, xix. 21.) 

Grotius gives the definition thus : " The State (civitas) is the 
complete collection (coetus) of free men, associated for the sake 
of enjoying justice (right or law), (causa, juris) and of the 
common utilitv." 


244 BK - in. NATION, i. v. 

If the reader does not like the writer's translations, as above 
given, he can refer to the places in Twiss or elsewhere, and 
translate them for himself. Observe this much, however ; as to 
the great substance of the ideas ; that Scipio, Cicero, and St. Au 
gustine,, fully coincide in their representation of the definition ; 
and that their words apply equally as well to a city, or a Pre 
cinct, or even to a Corporation, as to a Nation. And so does 
Grotius's civitas, although IT is usually translated State ; and was 
by Grotius applied also to the free cities and small Precinct- 
States of Europe. One of Ainsworth's definitions of civitas, and 
his first one, is, " Corporation." But of course in the later Latin, 
civitas usually meant state or city, but it mattered not how small 
the state was, nor whether it was part of another state, or of an 
empire, or not: and the small ones answer to o ir "Precinct;" 
and the large ones, to our idea of Nation. 

But, let us resume our attempt for a developed definition of 

Recognition does not constitute the Nation. Mulford, agree 
ing with other writers on the Law of Nations (pp. 252 and 
253), well says : " The sovereignty of the Nation has its imme 
diate," (but only its " external) manifestation, in the recognition 
of Nations. It is the moment in which there is a conscious reali 
zation of the historical power of a people; and each (Nation) 
stands toward the other, in a recognized sovereignty of the 
world. * * * The Nation recognizes in another, that which it 
is conscious of possessing n itself, in its own necessary being. 
* * * This recognition presumes then, respect toward the Na 
tion recognized as a Nation. It must concede to it the rights, 
which in its own necessary existence it asserts for itself. There 
is the application, here, of the fundamental law of rights, be 
a per son j and respect others <vs i ersons. This law is implied in 
the being of the Nation as a moral person ; it is the necessary 
postulate of rights and of duties. From this, then, proceeds the 
recognized right of a Nation, to determine its own political end ; 
the right to (establish its own political form." 

But "a people may exist with a manifest unity and sover 
eignty, and with entire independence and freedom, and be in 
reality a Nation ; although it receive no recognition from other 
Nations. Whether it be in reality a Nation, is to be determined 


only by its content, * * * but its recognition depends only 
upon the determination, in the judgment of another, whether it 
be a Nation." Here then, we may ask, how shall we determine 
just how much a Nation separating from its past, shall depend 
upon the recognition of that past, for the right of its separate 
nationality ? for its right " to be a person" ? And when doth 
arise the duty of that past, "to respect others as persons" in 
such a case ? And how much depends on present qualifications 
alone ? 

Mulford, (p. 253) well gives the " content" of a Nation, or 
that by which its nationality is to be determined, as follows, 
" the internal sovereignty which is manifest in law and freedom ; 
and the external sovereignty which is manifest in independence 
and self-subsistence." Nevertheless, the latter condition is too 
much of a de facto and not enough of a de jure one, to serve as 
the basis of nationality in our Social Science. It is a condition 
which directly leads to the extremest war. For the existence 
of a "moral personality" we must seek moral conditions of jus 
tification ; we must find those conditions, not in the mere fact 
of the birth, much less, in the violence of it, but in the moral 
legitimacy of it. We speak of this subsequently, under the 
heading " Birth and Size of Nations." 

Mulford, (Index to Chap. I.) defining the "substance of the 
Nation," says " The Nation is founded in the nature of man, 
is a relationship, is a continuity, is an organism, is a 
conscious organism, is a moral organism, is a moral per 
sonality." Furthermore, (in Index to Chap. IV.) he says : 
"The origin of the Nation is of Divine foundation, in its 
moral being and personality, in its government, in its au 
thority and powers, in the facts which indicate the conscious 
ness of the people, in the facts which indicate the conscience 
of the people." This is all very true and excellent, but is 
equally true of the Precinct, and of the church, and sometimes ' 
of other Corporations perhaps. 

Moreover, Mulford all through, confounds State with Nation ; 
and this he does deliberately ; for, he says in his Preface, p. 
viii.: "The words ' Nation' and ' State 7 are used synonymously." 
And, by him, "a particular State in the United States, is written 
' State/ and is described as a commonwealth ; as, the common- 

246 BK - IIL NATION, i. v. 

wealth of Massachusetts or Virginia/' &c. He thus develops 
things and principles, that are equally as repugnant to the 
natural rights of Empires, Confederations, and Republican 
Unions, as to Precinots. By his centralizing theory, even the 
rights of the Individual and of Mankind are glossed over, and 
Social Circle is not thought of; and no basis remains but Family 
and Nation. 

Neither Comte nor Mill, identify the Nation with either State 
or Government, but carefully avoid even the appearance of doing 
so. Comte's word usually is " Society," sometimes " Govern 
ment." Mill's word is " Government." Yet both Comte and 
Mill overlook the distinct rights of Neighborhoods, as such, (i.e. 

Wheaton does not commit the error of identifying State with 
Nation. Wheaton ( 17). thus defines the State: "Cicero, and, 
after him, the modern public jurists, define a State to be a body 
political, or society of men, united together for the purpose of 
promoting their mutual safety and advantage, by their combined 
strength. This definition cannot be admitted as entirely accu 
rate and complete, unless it be understood with the following 
limitations : It must be considered as excluding (such) Corpo 
rations, public or private, (as are) created by the State itself. * * * 
Nor can the name State be properly applied to voluntary asso 
ciations of robbers or pirates, the outlaws of other societies. * 
A State is also distinguishable from an unsettled horde of wan 
dering savages, not yet formed into a civil society. * * * A State 
is also distinguishable from a Nation, since the former may be 
composed of different races of men, all subject to the same su 
preme authority. * * * So, also, the same Nation or people may 
be subject to several States, as is the case with the Poles." 

Thus Wheaton's idea evidently is, that the State is some- 
. times above the Nation, namely, in Empires and confederations, 
that in all other cases, legitimate supremacy is what constitutes 
nationality. But the very word state, " status," standing, implies 
something having the quality of permanency, and therefore can 
not rightly apply to confederacies. 

When we come to Corporation, we shall find that IT can per 
form many of the functions of Nation, as well as that element 
can, and some of them better. Yet still, there will always re- 


main some of the functions of Nation, that are not performable 
by any other element than itself. And this is true, also, of all 
the fundamental elements of the Analytics. 

In our opinion, a Nation may be defined to be, one of the 
spontaneous, natural Elements or Units of human society; a 
governmental union of Individuals and Precincts, possessing or 
being distinguished by, most, if not quite all of the following 
characteristics. (1) One Head or Government. (2) Having 
the Government continuous, internally and historically, either 
direct or revolutionary. (3) Being apparently the development 
from one tribe, by similarity of Language, Customs, Religion, 
&c.: yet divided into several or many tribes. (4) Inhabiting 
contiguous Precincts or districts. (5) Having .a Special Meta 
physical organ or centre of attraction, called patriotism. (6) 
Having the real interests of all the parts, to consist in the 
maintenance of the national union. (7) Being distinguished 
from Confederacy or Empire, by having had a spontaneous, 
instead of a deliberative origin. (8) Being distinguished from 
Precinct or " State," by superiority or sovereignty over the other. 
(9) Being distinguished from Corporation, by having had an 
instinctive origin, and by necessarily embracing and referring 
to all the inhabitants of a Locality. 

The point of the definition, is, that whilst every Nation will 
be found to contain NEARLY ALL of the characteristics men 
tioned, yet many Nations will be found to lack one or another 
of them; nevertheless the element lacking will be different in 
almost every case. This form of definition, we, in our inward 
thinking, often adopt in the higher realms of thought : because 
the tout ensemble of the thing defined, remains a "constant"; 
yes, so constant as not even to disappear in "differentiation." 


Whenever the forms of government become so perverted, that 
they essentially hinder the real objects, then rebellion becomes 
justifiable, if it is expedient. If the rebels have no reasonable 
ground to think themselves right, and if they are really re 
belling for immoral or criminal purposes, then they are simply 
criminals or rioters. But if the rebels think they have reason 
able grounds for their rebellion, then they should be treated as 


recognized " belligerents." But when rebels are justly entitled 
to be treated as belligerents, then arise two cases, as follows : 

Case (1.) If the rebellion be an attempt to change the order 
of the government, the solution of its justifiability is the net 
average resultant of two questions, namely, the question of the 
amount of grievances, and the question of the power of the per 
sons or parties aggrieved, because power is a right when no 
higher law intervenes. 

Case (2.) If the rebellion be an attempt to separate from the 
Nation, then the two questions just mentioned, still come up, 
namely, the amount of the grievance, and the power of the par 
ties aggrieved : but other questions also come into the solution. 
There is the necessity for, and certainty of, the birth and the 
arising of new Nations, during all the course of time, past, 
present and future : there is the probability that no such birth 
of a new Nation ever will take place upon the mere abstract 
grounds of its necessity, without having some grievance as the 
immediate ground of it : there is the certainty that the greater 
a Nation becomes, the less willing its rulers are to have it 
severed, and the greater is their power of evil, and the more 
severe they are apt to be, towards dissenters or rebels (except 
ing the severity when two religious parties are nearly equally 
balanced, and are determined " to war to the knife") : then 
again, there is the certainty that, as long as human nature 
continues sinful and imperfect, Nations cannot happily attain 
their maximum theoretical size, previous to division ; charity 
must make allowances for the imperfections of both sides; and 
neither can the best nor the most competent rulers be obtained, 
for the largest possible governments, nor can peoples be made 
capable of submission to all, that charity might ask them to 


1. In General. 

Nations are begotten by three processes : one is, by outgrowth 
from one Family and tribe ; another is, by the mingling to 
gether of elements from a plurality of Nations ; and the third 
is, by direct.separation into parts. The first process is the slow 
and gradual work of ages, and seems to have been nearly con 
fined to antiquity. The second process has occurred only in a 


few cases, the principal of which are, the ancient English, and 
the modem citizens of the United States. The third process is 
like that in Zoology, termed by the physicists, agamogenesis. 

Nations in a living progression must, ever and anon, be sub 
divided. This is the same law we saw operating in the case of 
Precincts, which are the chief types of Nations. The ever 
increasing population of the world, creates the necessity in both 
cases. The generation of all new Local political bodies, must 
be by actual spatial subdivision. 

Just as in the case of Individual beings, (according to Spen 
cer), we have two kinds of generation, gamogenesis and agamo 
genesis ; that, in which fructification takes place indirectly, by 
means of germs or seed; and that, in which there is mere 
growth of parts, and then mere visible subdivision of parts. 
The generation of Corporations may be more or less by gamo 
genesis, so also is the generation of special organs, but the 
generation of the new geographical bodies, can only be by aga 
mogenesis. Now, while both kinds of generation operate against 
growth, yet the agamogenesis has almost an indefinitely greater 
degree of such opposing force, than gamogenesis. (See Spencer's 
Biology, 334 to 346). Hence by analogy we infer the neces 
sity of national subdivision, in opposition to indefinite growth. 
The only questions are, when to divide, and by what means. 
Any person who is acquainted with history must know, that the 
present division of Nations is not eternal, that in times back, 
there were fewer Nations than now, and that the antithesis be 
tween Growth and Generation has been confirmed by history; 
so that when the division has been prevented by force, the 
growth has been restricted ; and when the growth has been left 
free, the division has occurred. The only questions therefore 
are, at what density of population to divide; and by what 
means, whether peace or war. (See above, and Mulford, that 
recognition does not constitute th ' Nati > < . 

Our problem here is only to determine the maximum size of a 
Nation, taking its forms of government and all its relevant con 
ditions, all of the most favorable i-.ind. Hence, every item Iqss 
favorable than the ones we are about to give, will, or should, 
justify subdivision at a less size than is found in our problem. 

The maximum size of a legitimate Nation, depends partly 


upon its form of government, and partly upon the average popu 
lation and qualifications of suffrage in its Precincts, and partly 
upon local conditions. 

2. Conditions of Population and of Politics. 

If there exist any form of popular representation in a Nation, 
not consisting of the higher Corporations, the size must be 
limited strictly by the average population and qualification of 
suffrage in the Precincts ; because each Precinct ought to be en 
titled to send one representative, at least; and the whole number 
of representatives should not exceed 2500. These principles, 
applied, will give a population of from twenty to one hundred 
million as the utmost legitimate limit for a democratic Nation, 
under a system like that prevailing at present in the United 
States, or elsewhere; or practicable otherwise than by suitable 
political " Corporations" of the higher kinds. 

What science points to in general formula, may be expected 
certainly, although it may not come exactly in methods that 
science anticipates, nor for this or that particular reason. Hence, 
patriots have no reason to suppose they can avert the results, by 
refusing to arrange into small Precincts ; because, false divisions 
and false " State" corporations of five million, and all other un 
natural methods, only hasten the evil results, through metaphys 
ical or moral causes, the exact forms of which of course cannot 
be foreknown. And social science has no ability to look into the 
FAB distant ages beyond, to inquire if any other subdivisions 
may become necessary ; because, as said in the Introduction 
and elsewhere, the science of society can never be very far in 
advance of society itself. And ne\v subdivisions would bring 
their own evils, which only the science of their times can treat. 

The only practicable method the writer can see, whereby it is 
possible to enable Nations to hold together, with larger popula 
tions than are mentioned above, is the adoption of some of the 
higher Corporation-systems proposed under that head. Possibly, 
Nations might grow to as much larger size than the foregoing 
representation of Precincts, admits, as the Precincts were divided 
into political Corporations of thue higher kinds, UNIFORMLY; 
that is to say, the same number of Corporations, and on the 
same bases. But the practicable differentiation of such Corpo 
rations, seem to be only a limited few ; consequently, the princi- 


pie can only be expected to retard, but not absolutely prevent, 
national subdivisions. 

3. Conditions of Locality. 

Again, the size of Nations depends not only on population, 
and political organization; but also on conditions of Locality; 
and on the relation of population and organization to Locality. 
The larger the total Locality, the less the coherence of the parts. 
Two kinds of condition of Locality enter into the question. 
One, is the total space included, namely, the actual number of 
square miles; for by it, the number of diverse interests and forms 
are increased, and the possibilities of population, also. Never 
theless, the other condition of Locality is quite as important, 
namely, the linear distances of the extremes. This is impor 
tant both for military and for civil administration. Whether 
a country be 1000 miles long and 4000. wide, or whether 2000 
miles in each direction, makes no difference in the total content; 
but it makes a vast difference in its adhesiveness, the 4000 miles 
linear distance giving perhaps only one-tenth the cohesiveness. 

But the linear condition becomes still more important, when 
its direction of latitude or longitude is brought into considera 
tion. Because sameness of latitude, gives sameness of all the 
natural productions, and therefore produces rivalry in all the 
departments of industry. But linear direction along lines of 
longitude, giving differences of latitude, so long as they are on 
only one side of and not too near to the equator, give differences of 
all the natural productions. These tend to produce the harmony 
of industry. Incidentally also, they produce other vastly im 
portant harmonies, namely, the harmonies arising from inter 
changes for health, and for variety in study and in pleasure. 
Isothermal lines have nearly the same effects as lines of latitude. 
4. Applications to the United States. 

The population of the United States is now (A.D. 1875) about 
forty million, and doubling in about 17 years: hence, about the 
year 1900, the population will probably have reached its utmost 
scientifically legitimate limits. Even the present forty millions 
is the highest limit, with our present political arrangements, and 
with universal male suffrage at 21 years of age. Science can 
give, except the higher political Corporations, only two alterna 
tives here, either 1 ; to lessen the number of voters by increasing 

252 BK - HI. NATION. I. VII. 

the age or c ther qualifications required ; or to prepare to divide 
the country amicably, by formation of a new Nation, of course 
not between North and South ; dissimilar climates ; and making 
territories three thousand miles long, and only five hundred 
broad, but between East and West, making two, averaging 
about fifteen hundred long, by one thousand wide. All our 
extra stimulation to immigration, and all our hurry in " develop 
ing the resources of the Great West," are tending to this result. 
If you remove the seat of government west of, or even nearly to, 
the Mississippi ; then when the division came, the West might 
claim to be the original trunk, and charge the East with seceding \ 
The effort of the Westerners to move the Capital to the West, 
reminds us of the efforts of the Southerners to capture Washing 
ton. The tendency of increasing the numbers, races, classes or 
sexes that vote, is obviously in the same direction. 

Although increasing the age required for suffrage, may retard 
the division for a generation or two, and our " Corporation"- 
system, retard it much longer; nevertheless, the result seems 
certain to come, sooner or later. Nor is it to be denied that not 
only the good methods we propose, but also overwhelming des 
potic power in the central government, might for a time continue 
to hold the Union FORCIBLY together. But the evils of such a 
despotism would probably be far greater than its good. 

Improvement in public and private morality would also help 
us. Because there is no doubt, that our increase of population, 
and our increase of spread in distant localities, faster than Social 
Science is able to provide for, or morality to purify, are the 
great causes of our Southern, and Indian and Mormon wars, 
and of the general demoralization both private and official. 

These truths all combine to prove, that those ambitious persons, 
who, in neglect of the true conditions, are working so hard to 
" develop the resources of the Great West," and roll a tide of 
immigration thither, are " cutting their own throats," as Union 
citizens, and hastening the very dissolution they say they are 
endeavoring to prevent. The fear of vast solitudes of forest 
and plain, seceding ! What an idea ! 

Some writers are so full of hunting eternal or absolute argu 
ments, to maintain the justice of our late war against the Confed 
erates, and are so full of palaver about the absolute indivisibility 


of a Nation ; that they seem to have entirely forgotten that less 
than a century ago, " our own Nation" was only a province of 
the Nation of Great Britain ! and that we have acquired a 
large proportion of our own territories, by purchase and by con 
quest from other Nations. And such writers seem to have no 
conception of the difficulties which their theories, could they be 
believed, might produce, to Great Britain's giving us Jamaica, or 
Canada; or Spain's giving us Cuba; and so on. And if their 
views are sound, neither purchase nor treaties nor conquest, could 
make a just or morally obligatory transfer of territory. 

Most great Nations have repeatedly practiced on the principle, 
of dividing their own or other Nations. And our Nation has 
repeatedly acted on the principle that other Nations have a right 
to divide ; why then should not our national constitution, as a 
matter of theory, acknowledge the same right? Our constitution 
grants the right of its "States" to subdivide, on certain condi 
tions; and can it be that the superior power has really less right 
than the inferior, in matters for which it is the legitimate organ f 
The only peaceable method at present provided, is an alteration 
of the constitution itself: but even that would be disputed by 
the advocates of certain higher laws of nationality. True, the 
time is far away yet for a proper division : but constitutions 
ought to look far ahead ; and one of the good ways to preserve 
a union peaceably, is to make a separation legally possible, and 
thus let men feel they are not held altogether by force. When 
will Mankind learn, that not in religion only, but in all the 
deeper interests and affections, force is not the best reliance, nor 
legal inability the best promoter of contentment? And our 
object in treating this subject, is to promote the means which 
will really tend to preserve the Union. 

5. Provisions for Peaceful Subdivision. 

The principal means for introducing the Christian process of 
subdividing in peace order and friendship, are, firstly, Social 
Science, and secondly, written constitutions. 

The works on SOCIAL SCIENCE or International Law, which 
omit to recognize and provide for the necessity of the peaceful 
subdivision of Nations, are as far behind the age's wants in 
Social Science, as the old statesmen, who think all disputes be 
tween Nations must be settled by the sword, are behind the age's 


wants in moral and religious science. The scientific provision 
for such subdivisions, when they become necessary, is one of the 
incidental lessons to be derived from our idea of the nature and 
origin of Nation, as set forth in the previous part of this subject. 

The remainder of the topic about the subdivision, contains no 
theoretical difficulties, but only the practical difficulty and " un 
pleasantness" of blood and war. Because, if subdivision can 
only be accomplished by war, then the doctrine that rebels are 
to be treated as "belligerents," brings them always under the 
principles of international law, since they have then to be 
considered as Nations "pro tern.," no matter how unjust or un 
reasonable their attempt at separation might be. 

From what is above said, it is inferable that the usual argu 
ments are unsound, which, against subdivision, plead such ideas 
as the Nation's right of eminent domain, or its right of the per 
son, as against expatriation, and all those other minor kinds of 
rights usually treated under international law. Such pleas are 
unsound, because they all belong to a minor department of the 
science ; and during an acknowledged " belligerent" rebellion, 
are all held also in suspense, as only "pro tern."; and then are 
all revoked "per se," by the success of a revolution having 
subdivision for its object. 

These views seem highly proper to be expressed now, because 
nothing hinders the good cause of our national Union more 
than specious but unsound arguments for it, and especially, 
such arguments as would go to show that this or any other in 
creasing Nation, must continue ETERNALLY undivided. 

What remains for science to accomplish, is, to dispel the super 
stitions, ghosts and hobgoblins, about the subdivisions of Nations, 
and to provide for their peaceable accomplishment, in and by the 
recognized constitution of each Nation respectively, and by the 
doctrines of international law DE JURE. And vice-versa: And 
this is the beauty of science. It is a good rule, " it works both 
ways." The ascertainment, beforehand, of the true principles 
and grounds of the subdivision of Nations, preserves society 
from premature and unnecessary divisions, and from the vain 
attempts thereunto ; and places such unnecessary divisions, or 
the vain attempts thereunto, in the category of seditions, to be 
recognized as such by international law, and all the world over. 




1. Classifications. 

Most of what has been said already, on the Nation as a Fun 
damental Element, is applicable to this part of the subject, but 
need not be repeated ; the relations to Mankind, particularly so. 
And these latter relations will be further considered, when we 
come to that Element of Social Science. Corporations also have 
relations to the subject : because their full benefits cannot be 
obtained without some modifications of international law : and 
also because each is type of the other reciprocally ; namely, 
Nation is type of Corporation, and Corporation is type of Na 
tion ; and because the reciprocal relations of Corporations, under 
our proposed system, would be necessarily more intimate, and 
more similar to international relations, than even our inter-pre 
cinct ones, and would therefore call for a more complete devel 
opment and accurate statement, of international law, as type for 
inter-corporation law, than even the inter-precinct relations did. 
And so on the other hand, the inter-corporation law would throw 
light upon, and develop and improve, international and inter- 
precinct law. 

This our Part II. of Nation, being a brief treatment of 
International Law, may be prefaced by saying, that since it was 
written, Mr. Field's valuable work upon the subject has been 
published ; and to it the reader is referred. Let us introduce 
our treatment of the subject, by giving the classifications and 
outlines, from three long established works ; the first, French ; 
the second, English ; the third, American, namely, VatteFs, 
Twiss's, and Wheaton's: slightly modifying the classifications 
however, in order to perspicuity and homogeneity. For the 
sake of these modifications, and perhaps also for the sake of 
saving the trouble of references; the reader will pardon the 
selection of such familiar matter. 

Yattel's work, although old, is perhaps the most interesting 

256 BK - IIL NATION, ii. i. 

and generally instructive, of any work on the subject extant. 
Although, like the other old works, it contains a considerable 
amount of matter which belongs to other and very different 
departments of Social Science. 

Vattel divides the subject, about as follows. (I.) Prelimi 
naries. (II.) Nations considered in themselves. (III.-) Na 
tions considered relatively to Other Nations. (IV.) Of War. 
(V.) Restoration of Peace : And of Embassies. 

(I.) Preliminaries. Idea and General Principles of the Law 
of Nations. 

(II.) Nations considered in themselves. State-Sovereignty and 
its modifications. A Nation's duties to Itself. The constitution 
of a State. The Personal sovereign. The succession of the 
sovereign. Objects of a good government: (1) To provide 
for necessities ; agriculture ; commerce ; highways and arti 
ficial watercourses ; money and exchange : (2) Individual and 
general felicity; piety and religion ; justice and polity: (3) 
Self-defence ; national glory ; protection from or submission to 
other Nations ; vacant countries. Public and Private Property. 
Alienation of Domain. Rivers and Lakes. The Sea. 

(III.) Nations considered relatively to other Nations. General 
duties of humanity. Mutual commerce. Dignities and Equality 
of Nations. Preservation of their security. Mutual justice. 
Regard for Individual citizens. The Domain. Rules as to 
Foreigners. Changes from the primitive communism. Modi 
fications of the right of Domain. Usu-caption and Prescrip 
tion. Public Treaties. Other Public Agreements and Conven 
tions. The Faith and Obligation of Treaties. Sureties therefor. 
Interpretation of Treaties. Termination of Disagreements. 

(IV.) Of War. In General. Means and Officers of War. 
The Just Causes. Declaration of War : and War in form. 
The Enemy and his property. His Allies and Subsidies. Of 
Neutrality. What is right to do in War. Of Unjust War. 
The Voluntary Law recognizes both parties as having an equally 
just cause. Acquisition and Conquest. Individuals in time 
of War. Conventions and Agreements in time of War. Civil 

(V.) Restoration of Peace : and of Embassies. Peace and the 
obligations thereto. Treaties of Peace ; Formation, Observ- 


ancc, and Breach thereof. Embassies, Ministers, and Ambas 

Twiss's works divide the subject as follows : 

(I.) The Rights and Duties of Nations in time of Peace. 
And (II.) The Rights and Duties of Nations in . time of 

(I.) The Matters of Peace are divided thus. Nations as sub 
jects of Law. Incidents and modifications of international Life. 
National State-systems of Christendom, and of Mahometan- 
dom. Sources of the Law of Nations. Right, of Self-preser 
vation : of Acquisition : of Possession : of Jurisdiction : of 
the Sea : of Legation : of Treaty. 

(II.) The Matters of War are divided thus. Settlement of 
International Disputes. War and its Characteristics. Com 
mencement of War. Rights of a Belligerent within Enemy- 
territory. Rights of a Belligerent on the High Seas. On 
Blockade. On Contraband of War. On the Enemy-charac 
teristic. On Capture and its Incidents. Privateers. Rights 
and Duties of Neutral Powers. 

Wheaton's work divides the subject somewhat as follows : 

(I.) Scope. (II.) Absolute Rights. (III.) Relative Rights. 

(I.) The Scope comprises, the Definition, Sources, and Sub 
jects of international law. The Subjects are Nations, and Sov 
ereign States; which are described as two different classes of 

(II.) The Absolute International Rights, comprise, Self-Pres 
ervation and Independence ; Legislation, civil and criminal ; 
Equality; and Property. And Property includes both the 
right of a State to own for itself, and the right to rule over the 
property of its citizens. 

(III.) The Relative Rights, comprise Legation ; Negotiation ; 
War; and Peace. And War may be considered, either as to 
its Immediate consequences ; or as to ifo Subsequent ones ; and, 
in its relations, ^to Citizens, to Enemies, and to Neutrals. 

Now, regarding the various works of writers on this and on 
other departments of " Law," and considering the distinctions 
they continually draw, in the courses thereof, as well as the 
main classifications which they make, we find that the sub 
ject might be divided in all the following several different 


258 BK - IIL NATION, ii. i. 

ways : after allowing, in all cases, some one head for General 
topics not classible under any other. Moreover, perhaps there 
might be, in every classification, a place also for matters whose 
position was doubtful ; but this we only suggest. We might 
however divide into : 

Absolute, and Relative rights : 

Public, and Private rights : 

Rights of Persons, Rights of Things : 

Natural, and Positive Laws : 

Principles depending on Locality, and Principles abstract 
from Locality : 

Internal, and External Affairs: 

Affairs in Peace, and Affairs in War. 

At any rate, all these distinctions ought to be discussed, and 
applied to the subject, in the GENERAL Part of any thorough 
work on it; which of course, our little article makes no pre 
tension whatever, to be. 

The classification we have adopted for the present essay, is as 
follows : 

FIRST : The Preliminaries of International Law. 

SECOND : The Most General International Laws. 

THIRD : Affairs in Peace. 

FOURTH : Affairs in War. 

And of these again, we make only a few brief subdivisions, 
which will appear in their proper places ; and we introduce, in 
due course, some of the antitheses above mentioned. The reader 
will observe, that our General classification, differs from all the 
others, principally in this, that ours provides one general head, 
for all such matters as should properly be gathered together 
under the term, Most General International Laws. The minor 
differences of our classification, from the others, can only be 
made plain, by comparing with them, our heads, as they will 
arise in the course of our treatment. And if we succeed in 
selecting the most salient points of the subject, and in con 
densing and generalizing them sufficiently and clearly, we shall 
have accomplished the utmost that we can hope in this field, 
a field which is not peculiarly ours, and has been so ably and 
diffusively treated by many writers. 

There is no difficulty in applying all these principles of classi- 


fication, except War, to the relations between Precincts also. 
Indeed, these principles, for the most part, and dropping for 
malities, obviously appertain to every form or division of Local 
government, from Empires down to townships, each to each. 

In other places, we have suggested that this subject ought to 
be considered in such an order, and by the consideration of 
such general principles, as would in the main, apply to Inter- 
PRECINCT relations, and also to Inter-Corporation ones, as well 
as International ; and at the same time, point out the differences 
between them. Because, much of what we propose on this sub 
ject, especially what relates to neigJihoring Nations, is equally 
applicable in principle, to the regulations between Precincts 
established according to our theory: and excepting matters of 
Locality, is also equally applicable to our proposed Govern 
mental Corporations. We therefore need to dwell on this sub 
ject of international law, at some length ; yet, can spare but 
little space for it, except so far as it is connected with some one 
or other of our special theories : and, rejecting discussions about 
official persons, or diplomatic or other FORMS ; rejecting also, tech 
nicalities, "positive" or arbitrary regulations, and other details, 
aside from general principles more interesting to the general 
reader. Indeed, the great want of the age, in regard to all 
" law," is improved and really scientific and righteous classifica 
tions, namely, real GEXERAL-izations and SIMPLIFICATIONS. 
Because vice, error and stupidity, hide their heads behind 
" musses," SPECIOUSNESS, and complication ; and so the genius 
under words, appears as if it was the genius over things. But 
we are, in this PART, seeking for such very general principles, 
as will underlie Inter-Precinct and Inter-Corporation Law, as 
well as International. 

2. Foundations. 

The real foundations of the law of Nations, as also the 
foundations of all laws, are threefold. First, moral principles. 
Second, arguments of utility. Third, consent ; and consent in 
cludes both custom and compact. But when apparent differ 
ences arise between these three principles, they can only be 
settled by recourse to a higher science than th's, nimely, by 
recourse to Moral Philosophy. But in our social science, the 
arguments that may be based merely and only upon consent, are 

260 BK - in- NATION, ii. I. 

of much less importance than those based upon moral princi 
ples, or those upon utility ; because one of the very objects of 
our science, is to point out how the established order existing by 
consent, is wrong ; and how and why it ought to be improved ; 
yet with due respect to the transitional duties. And when the 
question becomes merely one between Principle and Utility, our 
theory decides to use Principle as the highest rule ; Utility as 
only subservient thereto. But it decides thus, for the sake of 
practical certainty and truth, whilst at the same time, it upholds 
the idea that utility is always coincident with moral principle ; 
but it feels itself incapable of demonstrating this coincidence 
perfectly, in every particular case. And here is where our work 
differs from most others, namely, in making comparatively much 
. less account of argumentation from apparent utility. Our 
supreme preference for principle over utilitarian argumentation, 
receives however, an indirect corroboration, by the fact, that all 
the languages of Modern Europe, as well as the old Latin, do 
not use the term "Law of Nations/ 7 but the term " Right of 
Nations, 77 as the phrase whereby to designate international 
law. (Wheaton, 12). Mere consent in international law, is 
no more than common law or statute law in the civil municipal ; 
and is liable to be improved as reason, morality and progress 
require, yet always with due regard to lawful expectations by 

A practical difficulty arises here however, namely, to say HOW 
the law of Nations is to be revised or improved. It will not do 
to hold with Puffendorf, that usage is of little account against 
theoretical argument; neither will it do to hold with some others, 
that special treaties are the only methods of reforming interna 
tional law. The true method of the reform, is, always to have 
recourse to the principles involved, but yet always to remember 
that usage, present expectations, and past contracts and arrange 
ments, are necessary to be taken into the account, in order to 
judge ivhat is the voice of the natural principle or "natural 
law/ 7 in the case. And this is a mode of thought, that most of 
the regularly trained " legists 77 seem unable to indulge in. And 
yet, only thus can the distinction be stated truly, between "natu 
ral law' 7 and the law of Nations. The legists study how to 
make laws unalterable ar.d unavoidable, the social scientists 


study how to make laws progressive and improvable ; and since 
between the old and the new, there always is a degree as well as 
a time of transitional confusion, so far it must happen, that the 
social scientists come indirectly in conflict with the legists. But 
this conflict is proportionally very limited, because the occasions 
and objects of it, form but a very small part of the aims or occu 
pations of either class, either the legists or the social scientists. 

The following classification (which is a different one from the 
foregoing) will, perhaps, do something towards harmonizing the 
different classifications that others have made, of the founda 
tions of International law, by referring them to their different 
relations to Consent : as Express, Presumed, Moral obligation 
to, and Pressure to, Consent. 

First. Express Consent. This embraces treaties, also the 
manifestoes of one Nation to another, also the opinions and the 
decisions of the officers and judges, in any particular Nations, 
who have to meet international questions. 

Second. Presumed Consent, in other words, Tacit Consent. 
This includes Custom, or, as the English say, long usage ; it also 
includes general interest or general convenience, as new occasions 
arise in which custom has nothing to say ; it also includes a cer 
tain high degree of self-interest or convenience, which no Nation 
could be expected to relinquish, even for the general good, with 
out compensation. 

Third. Moral oflligation to consent.. This constitutes what in 
our theory, are called the claims of Mankind ; so that we should 
trace arguments upon this foundation, directly to Mankind, as 
one of the original and eternal Units. This division of inter 
national law includes, what others call the law of nature and 
justice; it also includes the divine law, or equity, which is the 
amelioration of justice by kindness, on the condition of mutual 
ity. Both of these lead to the consideration of moral progress, 
for the condition of mutuality means progress ; and the opinions 
of wljat justice and equity are, vary with progress. And this 
subject of progress, both by reversing old laws, and also by pre 
senting entirely new circumstances, constitutes one of the greatest 
practical difficulties of international statesmanship. The other 
greatest difficulty, and that which seems to be pushing more and 
more for settlement, is the relation of the highly civilized and 

262 BK - IIL NATION, ii. i. 

Christian Nations, to the heathen, both semi-civilized and bar 

Fourth. Pressure to consent. This part of the subject is what 
other writers would probably consider, under the head of, the 
means of execution of international law. But we may retain 
the reference to consent ; inasmuch as inflictions on Nations, ac 
cording to international law, are not intended as punishments, 
but are intended as forces to coerce consent ; and inasmuch as it 
makes a neater and more uniform classification, to retain some 
modification of consent, as the basis of this Fourth division, as 
well as of the preceding three ; and also because the fear of re 
course to pressure, is often one of the leading motives whereby 
backward or selfish Nations, are induced to accord with improved 
laws, although nothing is said about such fear ; and, therefore, 
pressure may be classed as one of the foundations. For, the 
theory of the equality of Nations, only extends in practice, to 
etiquette, and hardly to that. 

These pressures to consent, consist partly of reprisals, and 
partly of treaties excepting the offending Nation from some of 
the usual privileges or honors of Nations, or excepting its citi 
zens from the common privileges of travel or trade ; also entire 
non-intercourse, and in the last resort, war. Although in the 
Synthetics we are to take pretty strong moral ground against 
war, yet in the Analytics we must treat it as a reserved right. 

3. Sources. 

The sources of international law, namely, its law documents, 
are summed up (by Wheaton 15,) into six, and may thus be 
condensed : -(1) " Text writers of authority, snowing what is 
the approved usage of Nations, or the general opinion respecting 
their mutual conduct, with the definitions and modifications in 
troduced by general consent. * * * They are generally impar 
tial in their judgment. They are witnesses of the sentiments 
and usages of civilized Nations. * * * (2) Treaties of peace, 
alliance and commerce, declaring, modifying or defining the pre 
existing international law. * * * (3) Ordinances of particular 
States, prescribing rules for the conduct of their commissioned 
cruisers and prize tribunals. * * * (4) The adjudications of 
international tribunals, such as boards of arbitration and courts 
of prize. As between these two sources of international law, 


greater weight is justly attributable to the judgments of mixed 
tribunals, appointed by the joint consent of the two Nations be 
tween whom they are to decide, than to those of admiralty courts 
established by and dependent on the instructions of one Nation 
only. * * * (5) Another depository of international law is to 
be found in the written opinions of official jurists, given confi 
dentially to their own governments. * * * Where an opinion 
has been adverse to the sovereign client, and has been acted 
on, and the State which submitted to be bound by it was more 
powerful than its opponent in the dispute, we may confidently 
assume that the law of Nations, such as it was then supposed to 
be, has been correctly laid down.* * * (6) The history of the 
wars, negotiations, treaties of peace, and other transactions re 
lating to the public intercourse of Nations." 

Here is to be mentioned another source of international law, 
namely, the moral and benevolent organizations, especially the 
religious ones. Ancient Rome had, as it were, a special band of 
officers to supervise and execute international law. It was a sort 
of religious body, as it also performed the religious and sacrificial 
rites of the occasion, viz., the collegium fetialium. During the 
Middle Ages, the Popes were often appealed to as authority in 
international affairs. And probably after all, science will not 
dispense with, but rather point us back to, calling into exercise 
some organs of the church, as the best and truest cosmopolitan 
judges, and the most reliable representatives of the rights of 
MANKIND. International disputes can be settled, and wars pre 
vented, only by reference to the highest principles of human 
nature, and under decisions by the most reliable men. The 
Christian church, therefore, may be enumerated as one of the 
undeveloped organs or sources of international law. 

Another source of international law, would be the literature 
and the legal decisions, that would arise, in the actual develop 
ment of the system of Precincts, such as we have proposed. 
This system develops fresh from nature, and ever receives fresh 
life and direction from nature, aided at the same time by all the 
other organs and sources of international law; all acting sponta 
neously and closely in unison with nature, but with the element 
of war or physical force excluded, by the peace functions of the 
Nation over them. 

264 BK - IIL NATION. II. I. 

Our proposed system of Corporations, would also develop the 
same principles, as international law, and would thus be another 
source of it. 

We do not pretend to state what the law of Nations actually 
is, so much as, what it OUGHT to be. Our sketch, then, is rather 
an ideal of what natural and Christian international law ought 
to be, as to its substance, but of course not, as to its form. But 
this ideal is to be all along subjected to such modifications as 
mutuality may require. The Christian ideal when presented as 
a political rule, generally depends in part upon the condition of 
mutuality. Mutuality of international obligations, is secured by 
two means, one is negotiation or treaty, the other is the actual 
law, as the same is acknowledged and made unequivocal. Hence 
in international law, there is comparatively less respect due to the 
ideal, than in municipal law ; and more respect due to the actual. 
For municipal law, being more thoroughly instituted into the 
common thought and common life, of Individuals, is supposed 
to occupy, and does in fact occupy, much of the position of a 
moral ideal. Another reason of the difference is, that the mu 
nicipal law forbids battle among its suljects, and presumes peace 
as its ground of operation. But international law acknowledges 
war, and provides for it, and is chiefly occupied either in pre 
venting, or conducting, or concluding war. Nevertheless, we 
present our sketch of this ideal in its radical form. 

Now, coming down from the abstract to the concrete, of course, 
the Law of Nations, among European, and even among Chris 
tian Nations, has had a historical origin. Nations having had a 
common origin, traceable by history, or having had intercourse 
for many centuries, will have a connection between their Law-s 
of Nations, their laws of mutual intercourse, more than in any 
thing else, at all common to them. Historical divergencies in 
language, in religion, in customs, in dress, &c., will all be marked, 
and generally tend to farther divergency : but the Law of their 
mutual intercourse, must necessarily tend towards a constant ap 
proximation, after they emerge from that obscurity and mutual 
repugnance which envelop their origin as Nations. Hence, as 
regards the Law of Nations, there is more agreement, than as 
to what compose the fundamental principles of Christianity 
itself. So that this Law is a " positive 77 law, but yet an " irn- 


perfect" one, owing to its having neither a legislative, a judicial, 
nor an executive power to enforce it ; nor is any such likely to 
arise just'y and properly. 

But in this Law, just as much as in Christianity, we ever have 
right to appeal from history to the original authorities, and thus 
to discuss what it OUGHT to be, as well as what it actually is. 
And whilst most writers discuss chiefly or only, what it is, surely 
here and there an isolated one, has righ to discuss what it ought 
to be. 


1. Leagues. 

The right of Nations to form leagues or confederations, has 
been sufficiently advocated above, under the Kelations of Na 
tion to Mankind. But such confederations, if for offensive 
operations or offensive war, would belong to the War part of 
the subject. But defensive alliances would belong to this Gen 
eral part, because their principal tendency would be towards 
peace. Yet defensive alliances could not be considered as be 
longing to this part, if the privilege of Individuals to do, much 
as they please, in other countries, continues to be maintained. 
Because, under that theory, invasion or Offensive War, is some 
times the only method of defence of citizens accounted abused 
by foreigners. But viewing the privilege otherwise; consistency 
with our own theory requires us to mention this subject of alli 
ances in this place, so far as it belongs at all to international law. 

2. Treaties. 

In International Law, Treaties fulfill nearly a similar exten- 
siveness of function, that Trusts do in the civil law, or that 
"state-rights" do in the Nation; namely, they can accomplish 
every thing not specially and clearly forbidden by some higher 
law. And therefore we need not enter into particulars; The 
most difficult part of the subject really, is, what relates to the 
continuity of treaties, namely, what reserved rights remain in 
either party alone to annul them, and the effect that war has 
upon them. 

In regard to the reserved right of revoking them, the fact or 
element of coercion in forming them, cannot be pleaded as a 
sufficient ground for non-obligation, because then, the means of 

266 BK - IIL NATION, ii. ii. 

peace would be greatly weakened, for as Dana says, "coercion 
* * * is of the essence and idea of war." 

On the other hand, absolute perpetuity of promises for the 
future, cannot be included, because in history, the changes of 
Nations are too great, and their lives too long, to allow any such 
preposterous claim. Perhaps the best rule would be, to adopt 
a limit of time for promises of future action, a new sort ;f 
"statute of limitations," say the average length of the life of 
Individuals, namely, 33 years, as the duration of the obligation, 
because then the average race of Individuals would have changed. 
It would not be admissible to allow the express use of the word 
" forever," or other similar term, or other dodge of the legists, to 
interfere seriously with this rule, because the unscrupulous con 
querors would always insert such terms. At this point however, 
the decision of a congress of Nations might be allowed, as a 
new sort of "seal," sufficient to lengthen the duration of the 
promises of a treaty, perhaps to a century, but scarcely any 
longer, excepting, of course, treaties for the permanent transfer 
of territory ; including within this exception, also, the treaties 
which acknowledged the birth or independence of Nations, or 
any thing else which from its very nature implied perpetuity. 

The question is raised, how far war, the mere fact itself, 
annuls treaties. In general we would say, war revokes the 
contents of previous treaties. But to this there are several ex 
ceptions, namely; stipulations in regard to the conduct of the 
next ensuing war; stipulations as to actions that had been ac 
complished and finished before the breaking out of the war ; 
stipulations in regard to which disputes had arisen and had been 
prominent causes of the war. This last mentioned exception is 
disputed by some modern authorities ; still, it depends upon the 
obvious principle, that the differences which had caused the war, 
Would naturally be, either provided for at its conclusion by 
treaty, or else were to be dropped; which could only be the 
understanding, by regarding the previous treaty stipulations 
revoked, and the questions then at issue, to be solvable only ac 
cording to the general principles of the law, apart from special 
ties of treaty. 

Other disputed points will be settled by adopting the princi 
ple, that the effect of war on a treaty, is to be judged, not by 


the general nature of the treaty, but by the particular stipula 
tions therein, each such stipulation requiring a separate judg 
ment. For instance, the treaty of peace and recognition of our 
nationality by England, in 1783, contained also a stipulation 
granting certain rights of fishery in the British dominions. 
Now the question is, whether the war of 1812 revoked that stip 
ulation. Politicians and " patriots" say, no ! But the writer, 
contrary to the common American assertion, must admit that 
this stipulation was annulled by the War of 1812. But, had 
the dispute in question been one relating to a previous stipula 
tion about boundary, or title to property, or other finished fact, 
IT would not have been revoked by the latter war. 

If, however, the war were caused by a Nation's express re 
fusal to continue fulfilling stipulations, which it had previously 
and evidently performed, and it should throw down the gaunt 
let of war as the alternative, such a Nation would of course 
revoke its assent to the treaty, and would thereby forfeit all its 
rights and claims under it. And if, in the struggle of war, it 
should be permanently defeated, this defeat would revive the 
rights and claims of the conquering Nation, without reviving 
those of the defeated Nation, any further than the conqueror 
voluntarily allowed, or than the general law of Nations, apart 
from the treaty, required. 

Again, if a part of a Nation rebels, and sets up its own inde 
pendent government positively, it thereby ceases to have any 
rights other than if it were a really independent Nation ; be 
cause such action binds itself, but it does not bind the other 
party. Hence, if the revolted part, is positively and perma 
nently defeated, the very best view that can be taken of its 
rights, is, that they are only the rights of a defeated Nation. 
In such a case, the old constitution occupies the same relative 
position, as an old treaty, namely, binding upon the defeated 
party, but not so upon the conquerors. 

The most that can be asked for a " belligerent," is the right 
of a Nation a pro tempore." But if the "belligerent" succeeds, 
and treaties of peace and acknowledgment are made by the mili 
tary authorities, in good faith to all, then such treaties are bind 
ing upon the old Nation, no matter what the old constitution 
or laws may have said. Because, if the old Nation is defeated 


as to the object of the war, then treaties made with its military 
power, must be binding upon it, as to that object; and all old 
articles and laws to the contrary, can now be considered as 
having been only " pro tempore" as to IT. 

The next question about treaties is, whether one Nation con 
tracting, is bound to look to all the concurrent powers of the 
other, which are necessary to complete the treaty. The answer 
would seem justly to be, that the first named Nation is as much 
bound to know the one part of the other Nation's rules and 
powers, as it is the other part. This question comes up in a 
serious difficulty existing in the constitution of the United 
States; inasmuch as the President and Senate are. invested with 
the treaty-making power ; but yet, if the treaty require the pay 
ment of money, or any positive legislation, it cannot be completed 
without the co-operation of the House of Representatives. But 
that house does not always accord with the other. What then 
is the right principle ? The answer according to fairness and 
equity would *seem to be, that " the .house" has the right to re 
fuse its concurrence, when, and only when, either the President 
or Senate, or the foreign contracting power, had reasonable evi 
dence to believe the house was in fact AVERSE to the measure. 
The contrary rule would take away the independence of the 
house, which is one of its essential elements. Not the question 
of constitutionality, but the question of opinion of constitution 
ality, may be brought in, as well as of expediency. This seems 
plainly to be equity in all cases .where the powers of parties are 
concurrent, as also in the case of Individual partners, in any of 
the common businesses of life. 

The case is, as if three partners are engaged in any business, 
under a general agreement, giving each his appropriate func 
tions to perform, then, any two partners are not bound to 
hesitate in every performance of their proper function, to STUDY 
whether the other one would approve, but, on the other hand, 
neither have they any right to do that which they KNOW is 
against his approval, especially when his active co-operation 
in some subsequent act, in his own appropriate department, is 
necessary to complete the transaction. 

But to give less right than the above, to the treaty-making 
powers, would be to trespass on the rights of the Senate and 


President ; although in matters that really would allow of long 
postponement, and of uncertain conditions ; it would be the duty 
of the treaty-making power to insert an express condition, " pro 
viding that the House of Representatives concur." But, the 
question .whether any matter would allow of such postponement 
a id conditions, the Senate and President are the proper judges 
of, provided they exercise their judgment in good faith. 
3. Eminent Domain. 

The subject of Eminent Domain, perhaps, belongs to the con 
sideration of the rights of the Individual-Nation, which have 
been argued above; but so long as there remains any part of 
the Earth, of which the claim of Eminent Domain is not yet 
settled, nor granted to some of the civilized and recognized 
Nations, so long it may be proper to retain the subject under 
this head. Other writers would find another reason for. consid 
ering Eminent Domain under international law, namely, the 
consequences of their theory of "do as you please in other coun 
tries," which continually brings the believers of it, in conflict 
with the " eminent" rights of foreign Nations. 

The right of Eminent Domain comprises; (1) The sponta 
neous right of ownership to all property not personally, nor 
otherwise appropriated, whether land or water, navigable or 
otherwise, appropriable by Individuals or otherwise ; (2) The 
right to purchase fairly, and to build, manufacture, improve and 
hold, all property real and personal, necessary for the perform 
ance of its functions of government ; (3) The right to collect all 
reasonable and necessary taxes, for the due performance of its 
functions ; (4) The right within its own boundaries, of govern 
ment, as excluding other Nations; and the right of fixing its 
own external boundaries, exclusive of Precinct-interference; and 
(5) The right ef reasonable and necessary, but only very general 
control, over all governmental proceedings within its geograph 
ical boundaries, even as against its own Precincts. (6) But 
when the question of division of the Nation arises, this of Emi 
nent Domain has no power over it ; as has been shown above ; 
for the question itself INVOLVES A DIVISION OF THAT RIGHT. 

In all these rights, \ve can readily see, that in due submission 
to nationality, Precincts have, or ought to have, in regard to 
other Precincts, similar concurrent rights, each within itself. 

270 BK - IIL NATION, ii. ii. 

Nations far in advance of others in civilization, assume on 
discovery, the right of government, and even of the property of 
the land, especially of nomadic or roving tribes. The right to 
the land, as to its settlement and cultivation, depends upon the 
rights of the unit Mankind, and especially upon the need that 
arises, because of the filling up of the Earth with population. 
The right of government by the very superior Nation, depends 
partly on that of the land, and partly upon an almost universal 
superiority, intellectual and moral. 

Now, the " Monroe-doctrine," is a partial claim to Eminent 
Domain, as against all the other civilized Nations of the Earth. 
Striking indeed is the coolness and assumption of ten or twenty 
or forty millions of people, saying to all the rest of the civilized 
world, we take one whole quarter of the Globe as our heir 
loom; and no other Nation shall send its national organ into this 
Quarter, to rule the savage and half-civilized tribes, that we 
are not willing to rule, and not able to receive without ruining 
ourselves ; nor indeed do we know what to do with them. All 
the Individuals of your civilized Europe, may indeed come here 
as Individuals, if you will go through the political sieve of our 
uniformity, and swear allegiance to our nationality, and to our 
claim to this Quarter of the Globe-heir-loom. Such a mode of 
discussion may be patriotic or democratic, but it can hardly find 
either precedent or justification, in eternal principles of Interna 
tional Law. Bat as a temporary expedient, to prevent wars be 
tween Ourselves and Europeans, the position may be tolerable, 
until better policies than War shall prevail, and better civil gov 
ernments, in Europe and elsewhere. But what a doctrine to be 
proposed as an eternal principle of Social SCIENCE ! And yet, 
it is our non-interference in European aifairs, that reconciles 
Europe to refrain also from interference with us. Besides, 
European Nations have nearly all of Africa, and large parts of 
Asia, convenient for them to carry their power and civilization 
thereunto; and this gives us an equitable claim to a similar 
development on this continent. f 

On the other hand, the right must be admitted, of every civ 
ilized Nation to establish restrictions sufficient to prevent foreign 
Nations, not at all homogeneous or friendly to it, from establish 
ing themselves too near it, or in a part of its probable dominions. 


But these questions of homogeneity and friendliness, involve the 
subjects of religion and morals and race, as well as forms of 
government ; and our government cannot cope with these topics. 

The recognized right of taxing foreign commodities, together 
with the necessities of defence, justify every Nation in a claim 
of exclusive control over several miles width of the sea-coast : 
the rest of the sea is held as common property. Since this law 
follows a coast as it fills up, instead of giving a fixed line, it 
seems to be expressed in the best manner. 
4. Arbitration. 

This topic is placed here, merely because its great prominence 
in the public mind at present, would be apt to lead readers 
to look for it somewhere under the head of Nation. But in 
our classification, the proper place for arbitration is under our 
head " CIVIL GOVERNMENT" ; where arbitration comes up, to 
gether with juries, and the other methods of settling controver 
sies and administering law. Nor is arbitration any better fitted 
for national affairs, than it is for Precinct or Corporation or In 
dividual ; howbeit, it is the best method in all cases : and one 
of the great problems of government, is to devise methods of 
making it practicable and regular, more or less in all. We have 
touched upon it in Summary Introduction II. X. 
5. Naturalization (Indicated) . 

In this general place, perhaps, rather than elsewhere, the 
subject of naturalization, and its counterpart, de-naturalization, 
ought to be considered. This seems to be the case, because nat 
uralization, although generally accomplished in time of peace, is 
generally disputed, if at all, in time of war. Another reason is, 
that according to our theory, the right of naturalization in a 
neutral Nation, ought not to be interrupted in time of war, if 
the consent of the adopting country can be obtained ; because it 
is often needed, then, both by Individuals and Families, rather 
than at any other time. But since the discussion is lengthy, and 
would interrupt the course of thought we are pursuing, and 
because it takes a wider range, we have treated it as a separate 
Division, namely, Part III. of the Nation. 

As to the right sometimes assumed, of a Nation, to recall its 
citizens from a foreign country, the claim is slniply a preposter 
ous tyranny against the rights of the Individual, if interpreted 

272 BK - in. NATION, ii. in. 

to mean anything more, or the disobedience to the command, to 
be punished any heavier than by a mere de-naturalization of 
the absentee, and perhaps by an order not to return. 

6. Forms. 

~No settlement of great international disputes can be made, 
until all questions of form become absorbed in the great ques 
tions of spirit and truth. A people may dispute among them 
selves, whether a case shall be decided by forms or not, in dis 
regard to truth and righteousness; but may not dwell much 
upon such a consideration, in a discussion with a foreign Nation. 
The question with us, for instance, is, not at all, whether the 
Alabama got to sea in due form of laAV ; but, the facts of our 
injuries. And on the other hand, when a criminal escapes from 
one country to another, as frond England to this country, the 
question is, not whether he ought to be held by our forms , but 
the question is, whether he is probably guilty. 

The question about forms of proceeding, in international law, 
may be settled simply thus : that all forms valid in their Locality, 
should be valid in other Localities, as to all acts and proceedings 
previous to war, or litigation, as the case may be ; but that after 
war or litigation, and for the proceedings therein, the forms must 
all conform to those of the government for the time being, of the 
Locality where the property lies, if the case be of property; or 
where the persons are held, if the case be of persons. 


1. Property in General. 

Having thus touched upon the consideration of the most 
general international laws, we consider next the particulars, 
separately: Of Affairs in Peace: And, of Affairs in War. 

We come now to consider that part of the law, which relates 
to affairs in Peace : also in two parts : Of Property : Arid, 
of Persons. 

The general rule of property is, or should be, that all property 
real and personal, must be awarded according to the laws of the 
location wherein it is situated. To which there are two classes 
of disputed exceptions. One class of disputed exceptions, is, 
where both the litigants are citizens of a foreign country. But 
even th's exception cannot be pleaded for "real" or immovable 


property, and therefore it should not be for personal property; 
because, according to our theory, there is no longer any radical 
political distinction of right or expediency, between those two 
kinds of property, in most modern and civilized countries. 

The other class of exceptions, is that of the estates of deceased 
persons. In this case, justice seems clearly to say, that where 
the deceased leaves a will, it should be held valid if legal EITHER 
in the place where it was made, or in the place where it was to 
take effect. For we cannot know which rule the testator aimed 
to conform to. This should be the rule, except that particular 
bequests in conflict with local laws, should be construed as if of 
an intestate there ; and that when the deceased dies intestate, the 
property should be awarded, one half according to his own 
Nation's laws, and the other half, according to the laws of its 

In all cases regarding property " situate" in one country, when 
the decision made in another, requires for its execution the aid 
of the one in which the property is situated, the voluntary 
concurrence of this one, ought to be obtained. And it is the 
undoubted right of any Nation, to judge of the justice of any 
decision which it is required to forcibly or legally execute ; and 
if any of its own citizens are affected thereby, it is its duty to 
judge thereof. 

2. "The Tariff." 

The right of tariff on foreign trade has been universally recog 
nized : but this subject will be considered under the element 
PKOPEETY. We may however say here, that international law 
only requires mutuality ; and mutuality consists, not in uniform 
ity of particulars, but in mutuality of spirit. It must have re 
gard to the past proceedings, and also the present condition of 
both countries. It must also embrace the consideration, of the 
tariffs of all the other countries with which each has commerce. 
All these considerations combine to make the resulting decision 
possible, only in a general spirit of friendliness and reciprocity. 
3. The "Person," in General. 

The claim of any Nation, to prevent its citizens from emi 
grating, although still maintained, is entirely contrary to our 
whole theory, and especially to the principle of Individual 
selection, and to the Christian spirit, as well as to the wisdom 


274 BK - in- NATION, ii. in. 

and progress of modern times. We can only regard Nations as 
having the same essential rights as Precincts, allowing for the 
increased size, and for other evident facts and necessities. It was 
formerly held, that a Nation had a right to recall its own citizens 
from a foreign country; but the United States have exploded 
that claim as made by foreign Nations. Nevertheless in the Great 
Rebellion, laws were enacted forbidding citizens to leave ; and 
a public spirit was fostered, that it was even the duty of good 
citizens to return! 

The Nation, you say, has the right of control or guidance over 
all residents, whether its own citizens or foreigners. If so, then 
other Nations besides the United States have this right. But 
the government and people of the United States are continually 
trespassing on this right, and thus making and maintaining 
enmity among foreign Nations. But the right itself, if claimed 
by a semi-civilized people over a fully civilized one, would be 
disputable. Moral considerations cannot be ignored on this 

But alas ! what shall we say, when a religious teacher enters a 
foreign, highly civilized country, but of an opposite religion; 
and there publicly teaches his religion, contrary to the laws of 
his then residence ? The answer of modern civilization must be, 
to allow this teacher, providing his religious sincerity is admis 
sible, even if his religious teachings seem to us to savor of 
immorality. Any other doctrine would have been good against 
Christ, and his apostles; and against religious reformers gen 
erally. And the same principle might partly apply to INTER- 
PRECINCT travelling preachers. The case is involved in much 

In cases regarding PERSONS, no division or apportionment, 
such as occurs in regard to PROPERTY, is conceivable, except in 
the claims of marriage. 

In regard to the claims of husbands or parents, in a foreign 
territory ; no country ought to be held bound to deliver up a 
woman or child, contrary to its own principles ; for such a course 
is horrifying to the best feelings of human nature, destructive of 
the human rights of the persons forced, and to the national rights 
of home. And the same may also be said of claims for personal 
services, in order to a condition anything like slavery. 


4. Specialties in Marriage and Divorce. 

In cases where the marriage is disputed, in a different country 
from where it is alleged to have been contracted, the ordinary 
international law seems utterly at fault. And judges and juries, 
in response to the voice of humanity, sometimes decide such 
cases according to the principles of justice and common sense, in 
defiance of all " law." 

One very hard case is something like this. A Protestant man 
A is openly married to a Catholic woman B, by a Catholic priest 
in country A-B. They live together (and have children) many 
years in honorable marriage, no one questioning their honor or 
virtue, although an old antiquated law existed, that required the 
Catholics, in such marriage, to go through some formalities of 
deference to the other religion, ruling in the said country A-B. 
Well, after a time, A marries a woman who is perfectly aware of 
his former marriage, and then removes to country CJ without his 
first Family. Then B, with the Family, follows, and claims 
alimony for herself, and maintenance for the children. In such 
a case, the usual international law seems entirely against justice, 
and on the side of the second alliance. 

But our whole theory easily settles the question differently, 
and upon several grounds. Firstly, our Summary Introduc 
tion demands that we jump out of the tangle of prescriptions, 
and go back to first principles. Secondly, our theory of inter 
national law demands that forms be absorbed by the essence, 
spirit, and truth. Hence, forms can only be introduced into the 
methods of proving the marriage, but not into the methods of 
its original contraction. Thirdly, the Family, according to our 
theory, is an eternal, absolute Unit of human society. Hence, 
the voluntary and deliberate act of the competent parties, as in 
tended to be understood, each by the other, is binding upon them 
personally, no matter what positive laws may say to the contrary. 
Forms or "positive" laws can only be binding upon other persons, 
or for real estate in and of the country concerned. Fourthly, 
the law of country A-B in such case was a law promotive of 
fraud. And if the man A, from the first did not intend to 
continue bound by the alliance, then he was culpable of fraud, 
and the law as to him was a law^of fraud ; and we know that 
in " law," fraud vitiates any transaction. Therefore no inter- 

276 BK - HI. NATION. II. III. 

national or treaty law, can bind to uphold for any Nation, such 
a law of fraud. Fifthly, whatever disobedience of form, against 
the laws of their own country, A and B and the priest com 
mitted might be punished in their own country, even to the 
loss of citizenship there, if that Nation chose; (but cannot 
reach as a crime, unto international relations, in any manner;) 
yet not to the destruction of life, of the Individual nor of the 
existence of the Family relation, because of the eternal rights 
of the Six Units. 

The subject of foreign marriage and divorce, resolves itself 
into two parts, which have just been treated of separately, 
namely, Property and Person. But to be more particular: 
the case occurs, of citizens of one country marrying within an 
other country, whether emigrating thither purposely to marry 
in contrariety to the laws of their own country, or not. The 
French law ignores such marriages. But according to our 
theory, as mentioned elsewhere, such disobedience, instead of 
affecting the marriage, should affect the citizenship. In brief, 
all disobedience of one's own Nation, and recourse for exemption 
to another Nation, should be held to be an irrevocable, or at 
least an absolute, abandonment of the former citizenship. 

But in cases of DIVORCE, more complicated questions arise. 
When person A resides in country A, and consort B gets a 
divorce in country jB, contrary to tne laws of A, such a divorce 
should have no more authority over person or property in A 
than waste paper; except by a statute of limitation for the rela 
tions of " person" only. 

The question, what authority should such a divorce have in 
country C, is answerable by only one of two principles, namely, 
either by a compromise, such as acknowledging the divorce as to 
the person, but partly refusing it as to property; or else by 
establishing some " positive" or arbitrary rule. But such posi 
tive rule, however, should be of the essence of the compromise 
above mentioned, or it would be an " arbitrary wrong." 

The civil law seems to regard removal from one Locality to 
another, made purposely to obtain either marriage, or divorce 
contrary to the laws of the first place, as fraudulent, and 
therefore as vitiating all the proceedings in the view of the first 
place. It may be admitted that such a ruling would be sound, 


under a system of laws founded directly upon nature and moral 
right, and not upon prescription. But such a ruling, under 
present " law," is merely a technical dodge of the legists. Pur 
pose to avoid law, fraudulent ! when yet the thing to be done 
itself, and all the proceedings step by step, are according to law ! 
The fact is, it is only when the things themselves, for instance, 
cheating the creditor, gambling, &c., are themselves wrong under 
any proceedings, that the charge of fraud arises under the special 
proceedings. And the assuming that a divorce, for instance, 
was itself wrong, is ignoring the right of all other Localities to 
form their own opinion thereon. 

5. Transgressors. 

In regard to transgressors of law, whether criminal, civil or 
political, the writer cannot see why it has ever been doubted, 
that in general among admitted equals, every Locality has a 
right to keep its own peace, by its own laws ; and that if for 
eigners do not like those laws, they should keep away. The con 
trary cannot be maintained, only so far as the Nation interfered 
with, is held .to be/ar inferior to the other, in civilization and 
rights. And even then, the right of the inferior, should only 
be interfered with, so far as its exercise was actually barbarous. 
But alas ! this rule would " interfere with trade and travel" and 
" manifest destiny," and so on ! 

The idea that the "flag" should protect persons engaged in 
transgressing the laws or comities or equities between Nations, 
is absurd as well as unjust, and if thoroughly carried out, would 
establish and protect piracy, as effectually as the laws and cus 
toms of Tripoli, which produced our war with that power. The 
public may rest assured, that quite other than the apparent or 
alleged reasons, are the real reasons for our national policy and 
dogmas on this subject. 

It is disputed whether a Nation is bound by natural law, to 
surrender fugitives from justice, to the Nation in whose jurisdic 
tion the crime was committed. Now, supposing laws to be in 
tended to prevent crime, the solution is, if the forsaken country 
inflicts the greater punishment, that is, if it regards the crime 
as of a deeper kind, the duty of return might be more easily 
admitted in logic, but would be less likely to be allowed in prac 
tice ; but if the adoptive country inflicts the greater punishment, 


evidently it is not morally bound to give up the fugitive, upon 
the old principles ; else, where is the right of a country over all 
its residents, or its right to defend itself from criminals ? Yet, 
in this case, the claim would be more likely to be allowed in 
practice. But in fact, the question depends at least equally as 
much on the citizenship of the injured person, as on the nature 
of the injuries, and also on the contiguity of the countries in 
question. The foregoing very general principles may readily be 
understood so as to apply to political offences, as well as to nat 
ural or moral ones ; except when the forms of government or 
political and religious structure, are essentially different, and 
antagonistic in their nature. 

The principal justifiable reason for the return to the forsaken 
country, is the greater facility of conviction and punishment. 
But the facility does not always depend on such a condition as 
foreign or not ; but partly on conditions of local distance, and 
partly on many metaphysical and moral circumstances. Even 
the expenses of witnesses, depend more on distances and modes 
of travel, than on flags or nationalities. The great desideratum 
is the establishment of such procedures, as shall insure the pun 
ishment of criminals, by some power and somewhere, by law, 
no matter much, where or by whom. Furthermore, in some 
countries, and even in some Precincts, conviction and execution 
of a sentence for crime, are very uncertain, whatever may be the 
evidence; whilst perfect evidence is rarely to be obtained any 

On the other hand, when the forsaken country accounts deeds 
as crimes, which the adoptive country does not account so, the 
rule of course would be, not to surrender the fugitive at all. 
Upon this principle, political offenders are not subject to return. 
But th is exception should apply only when the offenders are citi 
zens of the country wherein the political offence is committed : 
because we must allow to the citizens of every country, a degree 
of right to revolution therein, which we ought not to grant to 
other persons, whose very object in going there, perhaps was to 
aid in revolution, and above all, this exception should not 
apply, when the offenders are proper citizens of the country to 
which they return after committing political offences in a foreign 
country; because the exempting such offenders, is in effect, 


making every country a kind of base for military operations 
against, and for revolutions in, every other country. 

What then shall we say of the amity or friendship exhibited, 
when a great Nation, not only pleads for the release of persons 
imprisoned in a foreign country, for attempts to excite insur 
rection there, but actually passes a resolution welcoming their 
.return, and allows its largest metropolis to give them an official 
reception and ovation, on their return home ? And what would 
we have said, if the government of England had urged in that 
manner, for the release of our Southern rebels, and then having 
succeeded, the city of London should have given them an offi 
cial ovation ? and that too, at the very time they were bullying 
us to pay some disputed private claims arising in a previous 
war, and had even just recalled the second of two Ministers, 
because of their not pushing such claims with sufficient vigor ? 
The term " Insult" would not begin to express our indignation. 
And the question becomes really contrary to all scientific expla 
nation, when we remember that the persons so offending, had 
been originally citizens of the country wherein the offences were 
committed, but had become naturalized in and sworn allegiance 
to this great country, and then had gone back from it, full of 
true love and patriotism for their ORIGINAL country, to stir up 
rebellion against its government ! 

It is here to be remarked, however, that leagues among con 
tiguous Nations, to be durable and peaceable, ought to contain 
stipulations to return, at least the worst or most visionary polit 
ical fugitives, as well as civil criminals ; otherwise the territory 
of either party, is at all times liable to be made the base of vol 
untary or private operations against the other. This is true, 
whether the contiguity is physical or metaphysical. These are 
some of the cases in which special confederations are needed, 
between such contiguous Nations. And if the rule could not be 
made to apply to all the LARGE rebellions, it might at any rate, 
apply to the petty rebellions, that have no pretence of claim for 
recognition as belligerency. 

Perhaps the refusal or reluctance of a Nation to surrender to 
its neighboring Nation, the political fugitives who had needlessly 
disturbed its peace, might be circumvented lawfully by the fol 
lowing method : The Nation liable to such disturbances might 

280 BK - in. NATION, ii. iv. 

enact a law, that* all such persons should be held to a certain 
length of service in its military or naval forces. Such a law 
ought to be sufficient, because even the United States govern 
ment acknowledges that its naturalization is not valid against 
the foreign Nation's claim to individual military service. Be 
sides, if the law of the disturbed Nation provided no other pun 
ishment (than here mentioned), for such returned offenders, the 
adoptive country would be more willing in time of peace (of 
which we speak), to surrender them. 


1. In General. 

Our third and last great division of international law, is, 
Affairs in War. 

Although war is a great and almost unpardonable evil, never 
theless, it is a common fact, and has to be provided for. Every 
probable and reasonable* course to prevent it, should of course 
be pursued. We mean, not merely that every expedient should 
be adopted, to escape from war after provoking its appearance ; 
but that the regular course and policy of every Nation, should 
be carefully framed purposely, to avoid exciting war, or exciting 
those feelings, either of cupidity, rivalry or fear, which gen 
erally provoke it. 

Spencer's assertion that the position merely of no recourse to 
offensive war, would be equally as productive of peace, as more 
radical peace-ground, is erroneous ; first, because people differ as 
to what constitutes offensive war. It is erroneous also, because 
it does not tend to a thorough disarmament, nor to the discourage 
ment of war-principles, war-glory and the war-spirit, so fully as 
the more radical grounds. But this subject must be postponed 
to a subsequent volume, except as incidentally we here touch 
upon the arguments for ameliorating the severity of war, and for 
maintaining the rights and independence of human personality. 

The rights of Individuals and of neutral Nations demand, 
that timely notice of several months, be always given previously 
to commencing active hostilities : But this rule cannot easily 
apply to the immediate spots of sudden ebullition, nor to " civil" 
wars. To make it practicable for the latter, would be quite a 
feat for social science. 


Hardly any doctrine seems likely to become so practically 
efficient, in hindering or suppressing war, as the doctrine, that 
quarreling Nations have no more right to disturb the peace of 
the world, by their quarrels, than rowdy Individuals have to 
disturb the peace of a municipality, with their personal fights: 
or than selfish Precincts called states, would have, to interrupt 
the harmony of the Nation, with Inter-Precinct wars. And this 
doctrine may be made practical, by the gradual strengthening 
of the assertion of the rights of neutrals, in all possible ways. 

The International rights of War come next for consideration. 
We will treat of them under the following divisions : First : 
As related to the rights of Individual-persons, whether citizens, 
or enemy-citizens, including all three as moral persons; and 
consider those rights of the Individual which concern himself, 
his soul, and his happiness. Second : The Rights of War as 
related to the Ways and Means of conducting it, the policy, the 
modes of warfare, weapons, and ameliorations. Third : the 
Rights of War, as referring to contrabands, both things and 
official persons; and as depending on or related to Locality, 
whether in the Neutral's own Locality, or in Localities common 
to all the parties. In treating of these subjects, we, in the first 
two Divisions, touch property only in a casual way ; because the 
rights of persons are so much more important, and so much less 
regarded, by writers generally. In the third Division, we treat 
more of property, because the usual classifications for that sub 
ject, serve also to arrange the ideas in regard to persons. 

2. Relations to the Individuals of the Belligerent Nations. 

First, as related to the rights of Individuals as persons. In 
the first place, we object entirely to the old theory, that because 
the governments of two Nations, make war, therefore all the 
people of both Nations, must also become enemies and war 
against each other. We also object to the old theory, that the 
Nation warring has a right to whatever control it can obtain, 
over the Individual persons of its Enemy-Nation, restricted only 
by that indefinite idea, Christian or human civilization. We 
protest absolutely, and in the name of the Individual, against all 
such -interpretations of nature or morality. The old days of 
brute instinct and blind impulse, are passing away, and the rights 
of the Individual are coming up into notice. Nowhere perhaps, 


is the right " to ignore the state," more needed, but less easy to 
be obtained, than in regard to war. So important are the rights 
of Individuals, that we consider them, abstract from the dis 
tinctions between citizen or alien, Enemy-Nation or Neutral- 
Nation. And even property is considered and felt to be, rather 
a means of happiness to the Individual, than as a subject of ab 
stract and complicated rights. Can it be possible then, that we, 
having been nominally Christian Nations a thousand years or 
two, and Protestant three hundred, shall yet persist in forcing 
men to say, "Our country right or wrong"? 

Of course it is easy to see, how very opposite these views are, 
from Mulford's, and the high imperial German theories, that 
in war, the Nation has right to the services of ALL its citizens; 
and that, in brief, " the army is the Nation." 

While we advocate thus in theory, the rights of the indi 
vidual person, we must confess we do not see very clearly HOW 
these rights can be fully and practically recognized by Nations 
at war, except through Individuals concentrating in Peace- 
Precincts, or organizing into political Corporations, as will be 
explained under that head. At least, these must be the pre 
liminary methods, because it seems a long while away, before 
Nations will be so Christianized, as to allow their own citizens 
who enjoy the advantages of peace, to decline the responsibilities 
of war; and seems only attainable as the other ameliorations of 
war that have been introduced, namely, gradually and mutually. 
Although doubtless the good time might be hastened by treaty 
stipulations, so that even long before wars cease altogether, their 
most oppressive effects may cease to fall upon those who repu 
diate, either war in general, or the particular war in question at 
any particular time. 

Citizens of Enemy-Nations can be exempted from the hypoth 
esis that they are actually enemies, and from the consequent dis 
abilities of that hypothesis, only as the progress of cosmopol 
itan liberality, shall make proportional changes in men's feelings 
and habits, so that the exemptions would be reasonable and safe. 
And therefore it is only gradually that Individuals of Enemy- 
Nations, can be exempted as fully as the citizens of Neutral^. 
Nations are, from the rule forbidding them any intercourse or 
trade whatever, with the Individuals of the opposite belligerent. 


Nevertheless, throwing aside mere impulses, and appealing to 
reason alone, we can find no objection to such trade, except along 
the lines of belligerent operation ; and even there, the good feel 
ings promoted by light trade, would do more to produce just 
peace, than continued war. This has been illustrated by the 
petty trade between soldiers of the two opposing forces, in the 
late rebellion. 

On the other hand, just in proportion as Individuals are held 
bound to the WAR-duties of their own country, so also should 
they be held bound to its peace-duties as neutrals ; and there 
fore bound not to interfere individually, in the quarrels of ene 
mies or belligerents. Hence, the violation of such peace-duties 
and claims, should be considered quite as much an offence against 
one's own country, as is the violation of its war-duties or claims. 
Accordingly, " filibustering" ought to be held as a high offence 
against our own country. 

Great latitude must be allowed to all Nations, to judge for 
themselves, of the sufficiency of the reasons of war, so long as 
they only provide for injuring persons who voluntarily enter into 
the contest. But Christian civilization must more and more 
place NON-combatant Individuals, even when citizens of an 
Enemy-Nation, on a par with the citizens of neutral Nations. 
Scarcely anything was more annoying to our own citizens during 
the rebellion, than being drafted into compulsory service them 
selves, whilst foreigners were quietly taking their ease under the 
"protection" of their respective consuls. The rights of the In 
dividual Unit must be RE-ASSERTED, in the face of the Nation, 
the Precinct, or even Mankind itself. And the lesser Units 
have the more need, to RE-ASSERT their rights, because they 
have NO power to enforce them. 

According to these principles it is, that the law of Nations 
is more and more exempting neutrals from all the annoyances 
of war. Christian civilization not only strengthens its position, 
that unconcerned NATIONS shall not be disturbed by the fighters, 
but equally as fully maintains the rights of the Individual, not 
to be disturbed by them. Indeed, the change itself is owing 
quite as much to the rise of value of the Individual, all over 
the world, as to the rise of peace-principles. It will not answer 
here, to introduce jugglery of words about a Nation being a 


moral personality, for however that may be, there cannot be any 
question that a human being is a moral personality, and entitled 
to the rights of opinion and conscience ; especially in non-inter 
ference with other people's fights. At first, to be sure, the per 
sons of neutral Nations are exempted, because of prudential 
reasons, or of fear ; but that which has been begun from policy, 
ought to be confirmed upon principle, and the rights of the In 
dividuals of all other Nations, confirmed for the sake both of 
Justice and of Conscience. Hence the investigation of the 
rights of neutrals, has for us also the double use of an investi 
gation also of the rights of the warring Nations over citizens. 
Observe however, that the right of the Individual here spoken 
of, is a right to be not disturbed from his own peace, by the wars 
of others ; but is not a right to aid in disturbing others' peace. 

Of course, every amelioration of war, that decreases the number 
of persons or classes who are expected to become combatants, or 
the amount of the property at risk, is a great advantage when 
mutual; whether the amelioration be of sex or age or of profes 
sions, as physicians clergymen &c. ; so also, of condition, such as 
sickness or wounds. The same good principles call for, and the 
same good principles follow from, those improved laws that 
exempt foreign Nations from interference, and exempt also the 
property, persons and businesses of foreigners, from the vicissi 
tudes of war. But this very amelioration which hails w r ith joy 
every exemption of sex or classes, must condemn neutral Individ 
uals interfering with belligerents, unless in retaliation for similar 
interference against us, that has not been compensated for. We 
would increase the rights of Individuals, but also increase the 
punishment for admitted transgressions. And any Individuals 
transgressing after due notice, should forfeit their citizenship fop 
life, without chance of recall. And similarly punished should be, 
all conduct tending intentionally to excite wars or insurrections 
in other countries. The citizenship of foreigners, instead of 
being considered as granting immunity for such offences, should 
be considered forfeited thereby; because such conduct destroys 
the freedom of all the citizens of the oifending country, of travel 
in the other, and tends also to excite war. This offence is gen 
erally committed by the naturalized citizens of another country, 
or by the adherents of extremely opposite religions or politics ; 


and either in revenge for past vexations, or in hopes x>f future 
religious or political power by annexation; and is often the 
indirect means of introducing religion into politics. 
3. Ways and Means of War. 

Having thus endeavored to speak for Individual personal 
rights, and protesting that no methods or means of war, which 
avowedly and upon principle violate these rights, should any 
longer be tolerated, we come next to such Ways and Means as 
do not conflict with the rights of Individuals. 

The propriety or admissibility of different war methods, is not 
to be judged chiefly by their war-consequences, but by their peace- 
consequences. Hence peaceable Nations should not, by treaty, 
resign their right of recourse to extraordinary war measures; 
because a reliance in time of peace, for recourse to them in war, 
will promote peace, and free men from warlike thoughts and 
cares in common times. For, in these days, peace is the rule, 
and war the exception. The proper application of this principle, 
instead of the usual method of referring arguments to war-con 
ditions, would make a great change in the international war 
argument. And as to domestic wars, this principle aids the side 
of liberty, because it tends to lessen the preponderance that those 
who are in power, naturally have, over those who are out: 
and as to foreign wars, the constant reference of arguments to 
times of peace, promotes the interests and progress of Mankind. 
This principle of reserved rights, refers to several means, for in 
stance, privateering, minute-men, ready militia and guerrillas ; 
provided the same be citizens, or really intend to be, of the Na 
tion in whose cause they are occupied, or of an Enemy-Nation. 

Although Privateering need not be forbidden, it ought to be 
brought more under government naval discipline and control. 
This might be accomplished, by requiring a government-deputy 
to be employed on each privateer, as a witness, with liberty to 
protest, and in desperate cases, to take away, or to publish the 
revocation of, the government's charter and clearance; the deputy 
of course to be responsible for his conduct. This would place the 
commander of the privateer, on his own responsibility, if he 
acted against a protest. A somewhat similar power is [or was] 
possessed by surgeons in the British army, but with them, it was 
only for the protection of their own men. Sea-warfare differs as 


much from land, as does the mercantile sea-service differ from 
the ordinary land mercantile business, and must have a cor 
responding absoluteness of power. Reliance on privateering, 
assists peaceable Nations to omit war-cares during peace, and 
this is of great importance. So also, does reliance on Militia, 
" Minute men" and Guerrillas. 

The infliction of sufferings on Individuals, or on collective 
bodies of persons, by way of retaliation, is contrary to the 
rights of the fundamental element the " Individual," and can 
not be justified, unless, on the particular persons who have 
either voluntarily assumed such a risk, (as for instance, who 
have made an unconditional surrender, or have placed them 
selves expressly as hostages); or else on persons who have indi 
vidually deserved punishment, as those who in some manner 
have so far violated the usages of war, that their lives and per 
sons are deservedly at the mercy of the party who holds them. 
For, the attempt to justify individually-undeserved retaliation, 
upon the ground of the assumed rights of the XATION, or upon 
any other ground, can only be successful, by also assuming that 
the liability and chance of any Individual's suffering such re 
taliation, is one of the GENERAL chances of war, foreseen and 
voluntarily undertaken by the individual soldier ; but the fact 
is, that such chances are not expected nor undertaken volunta 
rily, by the individual soldier, because such an infliction does not 
occur to one soldier in a hundred thousand. And any chance 
which is so small as that, only operates upon a very few of any 
people; and there will always be a large number remaining, 
upon whom it will not operate. Another reason why retaliation 
should generally be discontinued is, that it is going back to bar 
barism, and is on a par with that old mode of warfare, which 
bound prisoners to the stake, and for the flames, and spared NOT 
the women and children. 

Possibly, retaliation may be just, when sufficient previous 
notice shall have been given, that if such or such an outrage, 
contemplated by the other party, should actually be perpetrated, 
then such retaliation shall be made. In. this case, the refusal of 
the other party to refrain from the outrage, might be interpreted 
as a constructive committal by them, of evils as great as the 
threatened consequences whatever they might be, and as a vol- 


imtaiy assumption of the responsibility thereof. But even this 
rule can only apply to the particular Individuals who compose 
the body which perpetrates the offence, or runs the risk, and 
not to persons who are entirely free from such interpretation, 
and from such indirect participation. 

Thus, the rule in regard to the effects of war, on persons, 
should be exactly the reverse of what it is, as it affects prop 
erty ; because property is NOT an element of the ANALYTICS of 
human society, and has no rights itself, although its possession 
may entitle persons to rights ; and because injuries to property 
may easily be compensated for, but injuries to persons, of health 
or limb or life, cannot be. 

As concerning corporeal personal movable property, belonging 
to a citizen of a belligerent, it belongs in justice and by nature, 
to the other party, if that party can seize it without infringing 
seriously upon the rights of a neutral. A compensation to the 
citizen, from his own Nation, is due, if he can show conclusively 
that he was acting in accordance with its laws, and had used all 
proper means to protect his property. But so long as proof of 
this kind is very difficult to obtain, and, so long as Nations do 
not consider themselves bound to make up the losses of their 
own citizens, in such cases, so long the growing tendency to 
spare the property of private Individuals, is a high evidence of 
Christian progress, although not a matter of justice. 

But the difficulties of proof may be partly obviated, as fol 
lows. A practice might easily be introduced, whereby one 
enemy would give to Individuals of its opposite, as well as to 
its own people, certificates of the value of supplies taken, or 
damage done. Such certificates, although not conclusive of the 
value, would be additional testimony thereunto. The present 
rule of compensating neutrals, but not their own citizens, and 
of sparing the Enemy-Individual's property, but not their own 
citizens', seems too unreasonable to endure very permanently. 
At any rate, the belligerent who gives such certificate judiciously 
and sincerely, should be free from all further moral responsi 
bility, in the case, as to the citizens of an enemy. 

Incorporeal and landed properties are excepted from absolute 
transfer to a captor, simply because they cannot be either carried 
away or destroyed. 


While speaking of the ways and means of war, we cannot 
forbear to suggest here, the following improvement. Let Nations 
in peace provide by treaty, where their battle Localities shall be, 
in case of war ; just as Individuals in health and safety, lay out 
their " cemetery-lots." If possible in these treaties, let all com 
binations of war-alliances, be anticipated and provided for, as 
nearly as possible. Let Nations, when they determine to in 
dulge in war, give a certain number of months' previous notice, 
and then let them resort to the appointed Localities, and confine 
the war therein. In other words, let the same refinement be at 
tained by Nations, that has been attained by Individuals in the 
DUEL, whereby disputes, instead of being fought out, whenever 
and wherever occasion or opportunity admitted, to the disturb 
ance and danger of the public, are adjourned to set times and 
places,' where the injury to unconcerned parties will be none at 
all, or at least a minimum, and, previously provided against. 
4. The Rights of Neutrals according to Localities. 

(a) In General. Having thus treated of War, firstly, in rela 
tion to the rights of Individuals, and secondly, in relation to the 
Ways and Means of conducting it, so far as these do not inten 
tionally conflict with the rights of persons or property; we come, 
thirdly, to consider it in relation to the rights of Neutrals, on 
their own and on common Localities ; so far as these rights have 
not been considered incidentally under the foregoing two heads. 
This part relates both to private and to public property, and to 
official persons of Enemy-Nations ; except their agents or am 
bassadors accredited to each other, or to neutral Nations ; because 
such persons, with their attendants and property, are almost uni 
versally exempt from the ordinary vicissitudes of war, and are 
not to be understood as included in our treatment of the subject. 

The rights involved, are summed up in two conflicting prin 
ciples: one, that "neutrals shall not interfere in the war," the 
other, that belligerents shall not interfere in the neutral's peace. 
These principles are of course partly conflicting, hence a com 
promise has to be effected between them. Regard can only be 
given to principal effects ; which are of two kinds : one, the 
principal effect of any given circumstances ; the other, the prin 
cipal effect of a rule applying to them. 

Here the distinction becomes prominent, between a Neutral 


Nation as an organism, and the Individuals who compose it. 
The Nation as an organism, must preserve its neutrality strictly, 
and in every particular ; but to expect such an absolute control 
over its individual citizens, would be absurd, in this age of the 

We will consider first, the matter of passage through the ter 
ritory of a neutral ; because the neutral territory is analogous to 
'the neutral ship when considered apart from its contents. It is 
generally admitted that enemies have no right to passage through 
the territory of a neutral, much less any right to conduct hos 
tilities therein : (Wheaton, 426 and 427) and, by modern 
writers, it is coming to be admitted, that a neutral has no right 
to grant permission of passage to a belligerent. (Dana's note.) 
Nor can the neutral territory be rightly used, in any manner, as 
the basis of belligerent operations. But it should not follow 
from this, that a neutral Nation is bound to oppose such passage, 
by force of arms, without the co-operation of other powers, who 
may be as much interested in the maintenance of the principle, 
as itself. Furthermore, the active Individuals of an enemy, 
have no right to passage across the territory of a neutral; and 
their doing so ought to be punished as an offence tending to 
involve the neutral into the war feelings, and hence into the 
war consequences. 

The next question is, what articles (and persons) are, and 
what are not, contraband of war. The common principle , is 
thus stated by Dana : (notes to Wheaton, 505 and 501) " One 
cardinal rule is, that the neutral may trade with the enemy. 
Another is, that he shall not intervene in the war. The prac 
tical result of the conflict of these rules is, that, in trading with 
the enemy, he must not break an effective blockade, and shall 
not take to the enemy, merchandise which is of such a character 
as to afford direct military aid, or which will help to relieve or 
avert the pressure of actual siege or blockade." * * * These 
various " considerations have led to a practical adjustment of the 
question of contraband, to the effect, that the neutral may carry 
merchandise to both belligerent markets, subject to this condi 
tion, that, if it be contraband, it may be taken from him, at 
sea, and converted to the captor's use." * * * But " as to what 
things do or do not come into this category: The test is variously 


290 BK - HI- NATION. II. IV. 

described, and more or less strictly ; but it seems to amount to 
this, Is the primary and ordinary use of the article military, 
when in the enemy's possession, in time of war f 

But this, the actual rule, is both unjust and unnecessary. The 
" primary" use of the article in time of war, is often not the use 
in time of peace; and then the rule interferes with the rights of 
neutrals. Again, it is not merely the directness of the use of any 
article, which constitutes its importance, but it is the special need 
the enemy may have for it, and the special vicissitudes and emer 
gencies of times and seasons, which of course constantly vary. 

Strictly speaking, according to natural justice, the belligerents 
have no right to interfere intentionally with the rights or in 
terests of neutrals at all : but the vicissitudes of war are so 
great, that this rule cannot be maintained. 

In the vicissitudes of war, opportunities are frequent, wherein 
the advantages of small trade Avith a neutral, would be counter 
balanced by serious interruption of the course of the war, and 
followed by immense losses of property and lives, such, for in 
stance, as in a siege or blockade. The liability of vicissitudes 
justifies this rule of war. But on the other hand, the common 
doctrine, that directness of the utility of the articles of trade, for 
military uses, also constitutes the contraband, is not sound nor 
reasonable ; for when there exists no special exigency, the gen 
eral injury to the trade of neutrals is far greater than the ad 
vantages to the belligerent. Besides, the refusal to pass these 
minor articles, so long as food and any kind of clothing are 
allowed, not only has but little effect upon the war, but it has 
great effect in producing personal discomfort to the soldier ; so 
that the rights of the T^uemy-Individual, as well as the rights 
of neutrals, are needlessly disregarded. But the generally re 
ceived policy is different. 

Now, we shall generalize yet more completely, if we under 
stand "article" to include, besides property, any government 
official person, excepting perhaps a non-combatant; and apply 
the same principles accordingly. This generalization is sound, 
because the principles involved are the same, whether persons or 
property are the agencies employed. For instance, persons in 
tending to enlist or engage in the enemy's service, are quite as 
much material of war, as chattels are ; so also are persons in- 


tending to carry war-material or dispatches, or to purchase con 
traband materials. The difference consists chiefly in this, that 
property, when captured, can be applied to the use of the enemy; 
but, usually, Individuals cannot be so applied. But this dif 
ference is quite limited, because guides, pilots, surgeons, inter 
preters, and even mechanics and laborers, can \yeforced to apply 
themselves to the indirect uses of their captors. 

We may now consider more in detail, these rights of neu 
trals in their own or in common Localities, under the following 
divisions : Firstly : Of affairs involving articles and officers 
on the territory of a Neutral. Secondly: Of affairs involving 
articles and officers on neutral or common Localities, namely, on 
the high seas. 

(6) Affairs in' the Locality of a Neutral. The generally ac 
cepted rule is, that the people of a neutral Nation, in their trade 
with a belligerent, must not furnish him with the particular 
articles called contraband, but may furnish him with any other 
articles. The restriction in this rule ought to be repealed, for 
the following reasons : It is impossible to execute. It causes 
irritating interferences in other governments' affairs, and thus 
constantly endangers the peace of neutral Nations. It prolongs 
wars, and increases their expenses both of life and property, 
without altering the decision. The analogy between forbidding 
enlisting soldiers, and purchasing war-materials, does not give a 
sound argument, because the soldiers, being persons, are usually 
supposed to be of the neutral citizenship; and thus the foreign 
belligerent, if allowed to enlist soldiers, would be drawing our 
citizens into ruin and death, to the injury of their Families, and 
of the country at large. But the purchase of materials has the 
opposite effect, stimulating trade, and thus benefiting the coun 
try furnishing the supplies. Hence, the general rule should leave 
the domestic trade of every Nation " free" to both enemies, for 
cash or bona fide immediate trade, but not f6r any form of credit 
to, or for, mere " belligerents," and not for loans, nor for any 
longer than the usual mercantile credit to or for non-belligerent 
Nations. Because the extension of credit is made to both the 
belligerent Nations equally, and thus lessens the immediate 
effects on both of them, and thus prolongs or stimulates the war, 
without any great advantage to any parties concerned. 

292 BK - in. NATION, ii. iv. 

Nevertheless, this general rule ought to have one sort of ex 
ception/ namely, the export of war-materials, and of all the 
direct means of transportation. Instead of excepting to the 
manufacture or sale of many articles used in peace, we should 
except rather to the means of transportation, to either enemy. 
In some cases, the means would be freight- wagons, horses, oxen, 
and so on. In other and in most cases, the means would be 
boats or vessels. This exception is not much liable to the ob 
jections, the other was. It is practicable in domestic policy, and 
does not cause general irritation. It is analogous to the prin 
ciple of export duty; which, in turn, is the same according to 
international principles as an import duty. Governments do not 
pretend to inquire into everybody's store, to tax his foreign 
imports, but tax them once for all, at their entrance into the 
country. The place, and the only proper place, to interfere with 
foreign trade in common articles, is, at the importation or the 
exportation of the commodities. " Rowdy" Nations disturbing 
the peace of the world, ask too much of all, when they demand 
that other Nations shall institute new legal proceedings, inter 
fering with the course of their own internal affairs generally. 

Hence, we infer, that the people of a neutral Nation, of right 
can unrestrictedly manufacture and sell, except strictly war-mate 
rial, and entertain war-officers purchasing materials, c.; and 
that trade with a neutral is not to be interrupted ; so that the 
only questions with us, relate to the transportation, and to arms 
and ammunition. As to arms and ammunition, which are the 
only things we can admit are strictly war-material ; the duty to 
watch their manufacture and sale, is no hardship, neither is it a 
special task imposed upon neutrals only in the case of war, 
because Nations, for their own internal peace and safety, need to 
have constant regard to such things, and ought always to have 
such a knowledge and registration of them, as they have of all 
other dangerous occupations. 

Yet our principles would allow the foreigners to come only 
into the few large markets, on or near the borders of the neutral, 
and with publicity to their actions ; but would not allow miscel 
laneous travel through. 

Again, the voyaging or departure a must not be allowed to 
interfere with the war" ; therefore, in case of means of trans- 


portation, wagons, cars, or other vessels for either belligerent, 
having been built in a neutral territory, the neutral is bound to 
forbid their departure ; then if they depart by stealth without 
due clearance, or by false representations, the duty of all Nations, 
and particularly of the neutral escaped from, and whose "state" 
was thus " ignored," is to treat such a vessel as an outlaw, for 
bidding it entrance into their ports or seas : and doubly so, if 
a vessel of war. Hence, in such cases as the Alabama, not only 
England, but all other neutrals should have forbidden its en 
trance into their dominions, not as a vessel of war of a bel 
ligerent, but as the outlaw of a neutral. And in case of such 
entrance, the vessel should be forfeited. Such ought to be 
henceforth established as a rule in the Law of Nations. The 
conception, to be sure, of an outlaw who is not a pirate, is some 
what difficult to get ; but not any more difficult, than the con 
ception of a " recognized belligerent" who yet is not a Nation. 

(c) Affairs in Common Localities. As to affairs involving 
articles or officers in common Localities, and on the high seas. 
Here comes in for consideration, the ship. The ship is the abode 
of human beings; it is an " arrondissement" a Precinct, with a 
recognized government of its own, under the sanction of some 
recognized Nation. Here are two complicated questions. The 
road is mutual, but the vehicle or car, is of the one Nation. 
The inference is, that the principles involved are exactly the 
same, as those in the case of the Locality of a neutral on land, 
except, that the travel must not be interfered with ; nor the special 
rights of humanity refused, in the distresses that men who travel 
by sea are particularly liable to. With these limitations, the 
voyaging ship has no rights other than it possessed in its own 
territory. In other words, the neutral's voyaging itself, or any 
part thereof, must not be entitled to immunities that will di 
rectly aid either of the belligerents. A neutral, on board ship, 
may manufacture spars or sails or guns, if possible, and may 
carry them to another neutral, but has no right to carry them to 
any belligerent place, person, or vessel. 

But now comes the more difficult question : the contraband 
property which any neutral sells to a belligerent, or the belliger 
ent official whom he entertains, has some other belligerent a 
right to transport, on the high seas ? Of course not, from his 


own, nor from the shores of either, nor to, any belligerent place, 
person, or vessel; but, has the neutral a right to carry such 
"article" or person across the seas at all? The entire denial of 
this right, would often refuse a neutral vessel the right of sail 
ing from one part of his own country to another. From this 
reasoning we may justly infer, that Mason and Slide! 1 MIGHT 
have required to have been returned to Nassau " as they were," 
or else forwarded, so as to reach their ultimate destination at the 
time they would have reached it, by LEGITIMATE means, if un 
disturbed by a neutral, UNLESS, instead of only running our 
blockade, in one of their OWN vessels, they had come through, 
in a neutral vessel violating blockade, or had run through our 
lines or our country. And as this is so, their case comes under 
that we treat in the next paragraph. Because it has come to be 
a settled principle of international law, that blockade is nothing 
to belligerents, only as it is effectual in particular; but is oblig 
atory on neutrals, when effective in general. 

The case then, was really thus. Rebel emissaries were con 
stantly embarking on board foreign steamers from New York, 
and as soon as at sea, would openly insult our citizens, and glory 
over their success in getting on board. Now, all such persons 
(having been spies in the United States, according to the laws 
of war, and also being warlike emissaries, and having obtained 
their passage surreptitiously), the foreigner had no right to trans 
port; neither would the foreigner have had right, to transfer 
them to the United States authorities for punishment. There 
fore, the officers of the ship should have confined the passage- 
takers, to the vessel until its return ; and then sent them through 
the United States lines to their Confederate home, a proceed 
ing very similar to that, by which the United States sent both 
Mason and Slidell to Nassau. The passages of the emissaries 
at New York, were obtained by deception; the capture of Mason 
and Slidell was by/orce. A friend or neutral has no more right 
to allow the deception, after it becomes known, than to allow 
"the force, after its illegality becomes known, to aid either bel 

We may add to this thought, the general rule, that the more 
indirect or circuitous, the aid rendered by a neutral, the more 
freely, such aid is permitted by the law of Nations. But this 


ought to be true, only for the reason and in the degree, that the 
circuitousness obscures the true state of the case, or complicates 
it with the relations of innocent parties. 

The Virginius, in the Cuba affair, affords another instance of 
a dispute settled erroneously by both parties, and on principles 
which will not stand the test of time. 

The claim of the United States amounts to this : That a for 
eign government has no right upon the high seas (namely in 
common Localities), to interfere with a vessel bearing the Amer 
ican flag and American clearances, even although such vessel 
may have been, with those old clearances, engaged for several 
years in fomenting discord and aiding rebellions in various 
neighboring countries ; and at the very time of interference, also 
be engaged in carrying arms and ammunition to rebels, even 
when their belligerency has not been admitted ; and may have 
repeatedly escaped capture by the injured country, through means 
of false representations and false oaths, in foreign ports ! And 
furthermore, that the fact of the said rebels not being recognized 
even as belligerents, LESSENS the rights of the injured govern 
ment, in the case! Whereas in the case of the Alabama, it 
was the recognized belligerency ALONE, that saved her from 
capture in or near neutral ports. And furthermore, that the 
vessel when discovered to have borne a flag and papers, to which 
she had no right, as the means of injuring the foreign country, 
and when captured, belongs, not to the injured government, but 
to the United States, which had all the while fostered the irreg 
ularities, and protected the vessel ! And furthermore, that when 
the injured government might have redress against the United 
States, for direct damages, if any such could be proved (which 
of course is next to impossible in such a business) yet it has no 
redress for indirect damages, (namely therefore none at all). And 
finally that. the assent (although only after persistent objection), to 
these principles, by a very weak power, under threats of imme 
diate war or reprisal, and of taking territory of immense value, 
from the weak and injured government, that such assent is 
proof of a principle of international law ! The whole conclu 
sion is so improper as ought not to need any argument. 

It must be admitted, that Spain, in her hasty execution of the 
men engaged, violated the rights (not of American citizenship, 

296 BK - m - CATION, ii. iv. 

because the Virginias crew, according to our theory, had for 
feited those rights), but had violated the rights of HUMANITY 
and of just international law; but this gives to the United 
States government no more than to any other government, the 
right to punish the violation of the laws of humanity. And 
yet the United States government takes those men to its bosom, 
and the people publicly honor them, just as England treated the 
" confederates'' against the United States. Although the offem e 
being political, cannot be punished or recognized by foreign gov 
ernments in their Localities. But the case is diiferent in common 
Localities, for in them one Nation has as much right as another. 

Now the truth is, that all the question relative to the right of 
the vessel to bear any national flag and its papers, in injuring 
another government, is just as much (or more so) a question for 
decision by the injured government, as by the one whose flag 
and papers are falsely assumed And in disputed cases, belongs 
to neutral Nations to decide ; either by diplomatic notices, as 
when the foreign ministers at Washington notified our govern 
ment, that the execution of the Confederate privateers as pirates 
would be held as a public outrage ; or by arbitration. 

The real motives of our government thus treating Spain about 
the matter were: first, our sympathies were with and for the 
Cuban rebels, and the other rebels whom the Virginius had aided, 
although Spain was a republic itself at the time ; second, our 
desire to get Cuba, and all other territory we can get near us ; 
third, a truckling to the popular impulse that burst out, when 
the news of the capture and proceedings were first received. 
Alas our government is in danger of doing as republican France 
did in her revolution of "'89", namely, allowing popular clamors 
tO drive us into the violation of international law, and thus 
stirring up all Nations against us. But in the case of the Vir 
ginius, democratic republicanism overreached itself,- and seems 
to have caused the downfall of Castelar, and of our struggling 
sister republic of Spain. 

The growing principle of international law, that more and 
more exempts neutral Nations from the effects of war, ought 
justly to be so applied as to exempt, not only from interference 
by the Enemy-Nations, but also from all entanglements therein by 
private Individuals, who undertake to aid either of the belliger- 


ents. In other words, the privileges and legal opportunities of 
private Individuals, to entangle their neutral countries into war 
or war-complications, must decrease equally with the decrease of 
the privileges of Enemy-Nations to interfere with neutrals ; and 
then, Individuals who interfere with the war-affairs of other 
Nations, must be allowed to do so at their own risk, clear alike 
from punishment as outlaws or pirates by neutrals, and clear 
also from their protection ; and their country, clear of all respon 
sibility for them. In short, neutral Nations must not be easily 
disturbed, either by Enemy-Nations, nor by belligerent dynasties, 
nor by the individual abettors of any of them. Still, humanity 
and Mankind must be heard, in limiting the punishment of polit 
ical offenders, within the bounds of civilization and Christianity ; 
as also of all other offenders. 


This subject, namely, international law, is connected with that 
of Universal Empire, and of Races, and of the influence of Chris 
tians and of Christianity ; and hence, should be finished under 
the head of Mankind ; not, indeed, in any one part especially, 
but in various connections. 



This subject is generally treated as a, part of International 
law : but with us it has to take a wider range of discussion. Its 
place of consideration under that head, and one or two general 
principles of it, are there given. (See II. II. 5). 

Naturalization may be defined to be the transfer of personal 
nationality, from one Nation to another. It is a subject which 
cannot be fairly nor fully understood, without referring to the 
Nation itself as one of the great' fundamental Units of human 
society: otherwise, the lengthy consideration of the subject, 
would belong to the division of " Civil Government" rather than 
to this place. Much that has been said above, can readily be 

298 BK - nl - NATION. III. II. 

brought to bear upon this subject, but is left to the reader's own 
ingenuity and reflection. 

Naturalization has been divided into COLLECTIVE and INDI 


Collective Naturalization, namely, the naturalization of the 
inhabitants of the whole of any given territory, takes place 
usually when any territory becomes transferred from one gov 
ernment to another. And if the transfer is made with the 
voluntary co-operation or concurrence of the inhabitants, it 
generally accomplishes the transfer of a full and equal citizen 
ship, without even those special reserves that are usually made 
in case of Individual-naturalization ; such exceptions, for in 
stance, as not being allowed the possibilities of becoming a 
member of parliament, or privy council in England ; or of be 
coming President or Vice-President of the United States. 

This transfer of full and equal citizenship, along with the 
comparatively small territory or district, that is separated from 
one Nation and joined to another, being founded in justice, 
and in a knowledge of human nature, and on the feelings of 
birthplace, home, &c., is an incidental but strong argument in 
favor of our Precinct-theory. Because it shows, that history and 
international law, regard and treat the human feelings for, and 
attachments to, the immediate Locality of one's birth and home; 
as being superior to, and more reliable than, the more general 
Locality of one's native Nation. In fact, this argument be 
longs more properly under the head of PRECINCT, than under 

In the transfer of Alsace, we have lately seen a pre-eminent 
instance of the superiority of Precinct-attachments to National 
ones : Because there, a people who had originally been part of 
Germany, but conquered and retained by France, some centuries, 
then when re-conquered by Germany, demonstrated the utmost 
aversion to returning to it. 

Collective naturalization is generally provided for fully by 
treaty, although it could equally as fully be accomplished by 
conquest, or by secession ; since all that is really needed, is the 
concurrence of the inhabitants of the territory Avhose allegiance 
becomes changed. And such a transfer is evidently more effec- 


tual by a secession, or an accepted conquest, than by a transfer 
between superior powers, which might be more or less against 
the will of the inhabitants of the transferred territory. 

Collective naturalization might better be divided thus : that 
which takes place by the annexation of new territory ; and that 
which takes place by the recognition of classes of denizens who 
had not previously been citizens. But both these subdivisions 
of collective naturalization, depend mainly, on the same prin 
ciples of morality and right as does Individual-naturalization, 
except, that the attempt to obtain special proofs of individual- 
character, is not made, nor any special oaths or promises obtained. 
There is also another, and even more important difference, in 
the case of annexing new territory. For in such cases, which 
ever way the territory goes, so also go the feelings of birthplace, 
home, &c. But, on the other hand, if the annexation has been 
produced by conquest, the evils and dangers of naturalization 
are greater, and the subject more difficult. With these and 
similar modifications, the PRINCIPLES involved in the whole 
subject, will be sufficiently discussed under the subject of Indi 
vidual Naturalization, as we soon propose to do. But as far 
as we are correct on the point, that for the annexation of new 
territory, collective naturalization depends largely on the same 
principles as Individual, our theory tends to discourage such 
annexation ; unless of territory where the inhabitants are already 
nearly similar to ourselves, in moral and intellectual condition ; 
or are acknowledged so far' inferior, as to consent to and produce, 
a territorial government over them by the superior ; to be able 
and willing to do the latter of which, is one of the great needs 
of the United-'States-government. Otherwise it is hard to see 
how we can deal safely with the Indian problem, or with the 
Monroe-doctrine ; which latter, even if fully assented to by Eu 
ropean powers, is threatening this country with great difficulties 
in the future, practical difficulties, of how to deal with peoples 
who cannot govern themselves, who need and want our protec 
tion and police over them ; but yet are, for those very reasons, 
unfit to enjoy the full rights of American citizenship, and whose 
overwhelming numbers, if equal voters, would first be a balance 
between all parties, and then, the ruling party themselves. 



An Individual may obtain naturalization, either by conform 
ing to some general law, or by special grant of the government. 
But we will consider the subject in relation : first, to the rights 
of the Individual human being; second, to the rights of the 
Nation renounced; and third, to the rights of the Nation adopt 
ing (or, as the phrase is, " the adoptive Nation/') And we wish 
all the principles here exhibited on this topic, to be understood 
generally, and as equally applicable to change of citizenship from 
Precinct to Precinct, under the reformed constitution we have 
proposed, as to change from Nation to Nation. But whilst the 
same principles are applicable, they must yet be modified in 
their application, to suit the altered circumstances. The double 
value of the principles thus treated, must be our excuse for some 
things that might otherwise seem unpatriotic, in this "Part III." 
of this article; and for giving undue length and prominence 
to a subject, which for the Nation has already been settled by 
history, and seems out of date. 

1. The Rights of the Individual. 

The abstract right of an Individual, to change his nation 
ality, and to remove from a country where he is not happy, to a 
country where he thinks he will be so, cannot reasonably be 
denied. But yet there are many conditions to which he may 
be bound to subject himself,- in making the transfer. All the 
reasonable claims of his native country and of its citizens, upon 
him, for any proper length of time, ought to be granted first. 
But what standard is to be used, to judge of the reasonableness 
of the claims? Not that alone of the government and people 
about to be renounced, nor that alone of the people or govern 
ment about to be adopted and rc-inforced. Therefore the 
standard must be one which might be considered a sort of com 
promise between the two parties ; and the judgment rendered, 
should be one which we would suppose would be given accord 
ing to that standard, by impartial persons, that is, by arbitrators 
or referees, being persons or Nations who fulfilled an interme 
diate character between the others, and who were so for removed 
from the scene of action as to be entirely disinterested. This 
rule is of course partly ideal, because the actual judges are pri- 


marily the two peoples and governments who are directly inter 
ested in any given case. But the rule is an ideal, suggesting to 
both parties in a dispute, what kind of a standard they ought to 
adopt, and what kind of a judgment they ought to render; 
always deferring to the maxim of the Chief Ruler, " Do unto 
others as you would they should dp unto you/ 7 with this natural 
limitation, namely, so long as the other Nation will do so to 

Another moral principle tending to illustrate this part of the 
subject, is this : Every innocent Individual has a right to live 
somewhere. The Nation of his birth has no right to expatriate 
him, without providing some other reasonable home. And this 
brings up the still more general proposition, that in the last 
resort for principles, every human being has a right to reside 
among the people whom he most resembles, taking into consid 
eration all his characteristics, physical, metaphysical, and moral. 
This, we theorize, is a still more general principle than even 
birth itself; and at all events, is the only fundamental principle 
of direct application, when once the operation of the law of 
birth is laid aside. And the practical standards and rules for 
deciding in particular cases, are the same as those just above 
mentioned, namely, Compromise, Fraternal Equality, and the 
Condition of Mutuality. 

And these principles are true, and the freedom demanded is 
just and necessary, on the ground of the rights of the IJSTDI- 
VIDUAL UNIT; and equally as true or more so, in time of 
war, as or than in time of peace. And the only exception, or 
limitation to the right of free emigration in war LESS THAN 
in peace, would be, that the emigrant should not remove to the 
ENEMY-NATION; but might, to any other one he pleased, that 
appeared to be a suitable one, and to which he seemed to desire 
to go in good faith there to abide. 

But this principle is not to interrupt any rights of a native 
country, which are valid in peace as well as in war. Of which 
we speak next. 

2. The Eights of the Renounced Nation. 

" Mr. Wheaton, while Minister at Berlin," stated one of the 
true and fair principles of naturalization, when he " declined to 
interfere to protect from military service, a Prussian subject who 

302 BK - ni. NATION, in. in. 

had been naturalized in the United States, but had returned to 
Prussia. Mr. Wheaton said to him : " Had you remained in 
the United States, or visited any foreign country EXCEPT PRUS 
SIA, on your lawful business, you would have been protected by 
the American authorities, at home and abroad, in the enjoyment 
of your rights and privileges as a naturalized citizen of the 
United States. But, having returned to the country of your 
birth, your native domicile and national character REVERT, so 
long as you remain in the Prussian dominions; and ypu are 
bound in all respects to obey the laws exactly as if you had 
never emigrated. 77 Dana's note, 86. 

The reason of the justice of such a decision is, that the con 
trary rule might easily be so employed as to seriously impair 
national rights. Because, when a citizen returns to his native 
country, he has its accent, its manners, and its personal relation 
ships ; all of which tend both to bind him thereunto in feeling, 
and also tend to prevent the national authorities from distin 
guishing such foreigners from citizens. If returning to their 
native country were indulged in by large numbers of foreigners 
of that kind, a country would have scarcely any escape from re 
quiring, at every important crisis, tests of allegiance from ALL 
its inhabitants an almost endless task, as also very expensive 
and very unsatisfactory. The only easy plan to allow self- 
expatriated foreigners to return as the citizens of another Na 
tion, would be, for the original country to command methods 
whereby every such person, immediately on his return, should 
register himself as such, in some Locality, arid confine himself 

Leaving one's country and changing citizenship, is something 
like a woman's leaving her husband, and afterwards marrying 
another; and if the leaving was FOR GOOD CAUSE, the new 
husband would still naturally be averse to having his wife re 
turning to friendship with the former husband, however willing 
he might be for her to form friendships with other men. 

If the past disorders are not abandoned, foreign Nations 
may, at last, be driven to absolutely forbid their self-expatriated 
citizens from ever returning ; or forbid their original departure, 
either entirely, or until they have taken oaths and given security, 
not to return. Or our policy of forcing our ideas of nationality 


on other governments, and thereby provoking their secret ani 
mosity, may, some day, by the aid of our internal dissensions, 
have very disastrous consequences. 

The plea by which the United-States-government endeavors 
to repudiate these sound principles, and to deny that nationality 
reverts to a foreigner upon revisiting his native country, is, that 
the general claims of foreign Nations under general laws, are of 
no application, and that only when the claims have become 
individualized, so as to call for, and to apply to the immediate 
duty of, the Individual, do they have international force. But 
this is merely ignoring the foreign system altogether. True, the 
writer's private theory, claims, that no government has a right 
to forbid its citizens to remove to another country ; but neither 
international law, nor the United-States-government, acknowl 
edges this principle. And our government has no right to act 
upon it on one side of the question and not on the other. 

The foreign system giving us trouble in this respect, may be 
compared with our own system thus. The foreign, instead of 
drafting men from its mass for military service, only during 
war, designates a certain proportion of its young men for an 
nual discipline, and to be called out first in case of war. Now 
if we, every few years, were to draft a portion of our people for 
such purposes, we would then have a class of citizens for, and a 
method of comparison with the foreign ones. In times of war, 
there have generally been formed in the United States, bodies 
of volunteers called " minute men," " home guards," &c. Such 
bodies of men resemble young foreigners in their own country, 
except in the variable matter of having volunteered. The two 
systems are entirely different ; and our decisions and policy pre 
sumptuously violate the foreign internal classification of citizens, 
instead of only attempting to have it modified reasonably, by 
equitable limitations. 

But we may conduct this discussion of the rights of the Na 
tion renounced, by a resort to higher grounds. Now, when we 
bear in mind the distinctive characteristics of national inde 
pendence, that between Nations, the simplest reciprocities of 
justice require previous treaty stipulations, and that the return 
of an escaped slave, even between Precincts (states) of the same 
Nation, requires constitutional provis: n ; we infer at once that 


when an Individual escapes or removes to another government, 
the government abandoned has naturally no further national 
rights over him. Now, only apply this same principle to the 
reverse case, and the question of naturalization would be at least 
half settled. Only say, that the actual migration from and 
leaving of one's adoptive country, and entrance into the former, 
release a person from the protection, as well as from the claims, 
of the last country left; and hold-to the principle, and the 
question is half settled. Certainly, if leaving one's native 
country is an avoidance of the laws, then a return to that 
country is a revival of its laws. 

In fact, the question may be argued on still broader grounds, 
and without reference to any previous naturalization. It may 
be maintained theoretically in general, that if leaving one's 
country, whether native or adoptive country, is a virtual for 
saking of its claims, so therefore it must be a virtual forsaking 
of its protection ; unless there are treaty stipulations to the con 
trary. And, on the other hand, if leaving a country is an 
escape from its laws, so therefore a voluntary and Individual 
entrance into a country, is theoretically a submission to or ac 
ceptance of its laws. And if there are any just exceptions to 
these principles, let them be considered and settled as exceptions; 
but let not the universal principles of justice and fairness, be 
perverted, to excuse the exceptional cases. If the highly civil 
ized Nations of Europe, claim the right for their citizens to 
reside and trade in the barbarous countries of Asia and Africa, 
yet without subjecting those citizens to the barbarous and super 
stitious laws and customs of such degraded peoples ; let it be 
SAID so, at least to ourselves scientifically ; and let not the great 
laws of Mankind or of equality, be perverted. And again, if 
Democracies and Republics are going to claim as much supe 
riority of rights, over Kingdoms and Empires, as civilized Na 
tions claim over the uncivilized, or the half-civilized ones, let 
that claim also be scientifically expressed ; and let the inside 
world of our own citizens know, that if the Nations of Europe 
are jealous of us, they are so, in consequence of the direct 
avowals of some of our leading men, and of the long continued 
aggressive policy of our national government : and, a change of 
our policy would soon allay their jealousy. 


It is strange, and wonderfully inconsistent, that a people who 
have such strong and centralizing views of nationality, as those 
of the United States, should have such loose views of the trans 
fer of citizenship from one Nation to another. It is a subject 
by which, more than by any other, in this era of the world, our 
foreign relations are liable to be disturbed, and universal war 
and disorder, provoked. 

The theory and decisions of the United States government, so 
far as they have been developed, until after the great rebellion, 
were peculiarly selfish and one-sided, in regard to alienism or 
expatriation. Thus, the right of an American-born citizen to 
become naturalized into any foreign government, had been de 
nied by us, whilst the right of the citizens of all foreign gov 
ernments, to leave their own countries and become naturalized 
in the United States, had been fiercely maintained. Yet the 
right had even been conceded, of a foreigner once naturalized in 
the United States, to renounce and again become a citizen of his 
native government. And the whole set of our laws on the sub 
ject, was evidently intended to allow and encourage the greatest, 
possible amount of seduction of the citizens of other govern 
ments, away from them, together with the minimum of desertion 
from our own ; and without regard to consistency or national 
equality. That our policy was clearly demagogic, and tended to 
incite disturbance throughout the world, is fully proved by the. 
fact that when the very foreigners whom we had received as 
citizens, and upon oaths of allegiance abjuring all attachments to 
foreign governments, departed from us, to incite or participate 
in the struggles of their native countries, we still retained over 
them the fostering and protecting care of our flag, and thus in 
directly excited and stimulated them to foreign aggressions. 
But this was one-sided ; for a citizen who proves by his acts, 
that his warmest political affections are still in and towards his 
native country, thus proves that in heart he has not become 
truly naturalized-out from the land of his birth. The proper 
course for our government to take, is to openly and fully warn 
our citizens, that interference with the affairs of other govern 
ments, will be taken as the virtual renunciation of citizenship 
in the United States ; and if any difference, this interpretation 
will be more surely given to acts of foreigners returning to their 


306 BK - IIL NATION, in. in. 

native lands and interfering there, than in regard to any other 
kinds of interference ; on the principle that return revives citi 
zenship there. And these warnings should be repeated, and re- 
published thoroughly, when circumstances seemed to call for 
them ; and then, if our Individuals would persist in interfering 
with other countries, and in efforts and tendencies to embroil us 
in foreign disturbances, then we had no more care for them than 
any other neutrals had ; and the consequences of such expatria 
tion, should be allowed to fall upon those who so persistently 
bravadoed all the Nations interested, subject only to the claims 
of common pity and humanity. The whole principle of our 
past conduct, reminds one of the course taken by the French 
Republic of 1789, which ended in stirring up all Europe against 
it. The only supremacy which can be granted by international 
law, to one government or people, over others, is a supremacy 
founded upon intellect controlled by morality and goodness; and 
only that kind of supremacy will ultimately prevail : and that iy 
a s i remacy which will come about more by general consent, 
than by force or threats. 

Since the <r eat rebellion of ' 6 1-6 5, we have, to be sure, seen 
that our policy was to amend our principles, but the amending 
has only been of the theory chiefly, and not much, if any, of our 
pract V(-s. Tut since England has settled the Alabama claims 
liberally and promptly, and is treating us fraternally in the 
affair of ou: 1 centenni i! ; it is time for us to let our old enmity 
against her drop forever. 

3. The Ilights of the Adoptive Nation. 

We may sa , in general, that although our theory utterly de 
nies the right of what our government did during the rebellion ; 
namely, denie th right of a national government to forbid the 
departure of its citizens, yet it by no means forbids Nations the 
right of discretion, as to the reception or refusal of immigrants. 
For instance, compare the Nation with the Individual Unit. 
An Individual has liberty to go where he pleases, although he 
has no right to intrude into the company of those who do not 
want him. But this restriction is counteracted by the rights of 
another unit, namely, Mankind. For, where populat on is in 
excess of the capacity of the land to sustain it, and whilst there 
are immense territories of other Nations uninhabited, it certainly 


is the duty of some of those Nations, to receive the immigrants. 
But whose duty is it? We answer, that treating the question 
now as a moral one, we are to consider not only the extent of 
uninhabited territory, nor the abundance of its wealth and pro 
ductions ; neither are we to consider only the choice of the immi 
grants, when that choice depends merely on the consequences of 
such things as cheap land and high wages ; but we are to con 
sider moral and intellectual relations. So that the duty of re 
ceiving the immigrants, will devolve upon that Nation which, 
having the most ability to do it, is yet nearest like them in intel 
lectual, moral and religious character. This principle may be 
modified to favor the reception of such classes of persons as are 
scarcely fit in morals and intellectuality, the better, when such 
persons are of a mild and peaceful and obedient disposition, so 
that they will readily place themselves under the guidance of 
their adopted country. For, among Nations as well as among 
Individuals, self-preservation is the first law of nature. And 
no theory in this case can be more unreasonable, than the suppo 
sition that everybody has a right to go everywhere, and exer 
cise political supremacy, and the consequent powers of governing 
others ox THEIR native soil. And on the other hand, the right 
of the immigrants to be free from imposition or tyranny of 
their adoptive country, is involved in the necessity and the fact 
of their coming, and in the duty of the other party to receive 

Now here is another place where our Precinct and Corpora 
tion theories come in so admirably. In order then, to secure the 
rights of all parties, probably the most satisfactory plan would 
be, for immigrants to be allowed to form their own Corporations, 
for their own government and rule, without control over, or 
even without the ordinary subjection of their internal personal 
affairs to, the government of the adoptive country. The feasi 
bility of this will be deducible from our general principles of 
Corporation, although no special allusion need be made to it 

But the Precinct-system offers really the most perfect and best 
plan, for foreigners to enjoy their own rights customs and reli 
gion, -with the least amount of interference with those of other 
persons, or, of the adoptive Nation itself. But inasmuch as it is 


sometimes inconvenient, the Corporation-system would give the 
most general satisfaction to them. Yet both systems can be em 
ployed, some in some cases, and some in others. But the Pre 
cinct-system is most effectual, both for releasing minorities from 
the power of majorities, and also for releasing majorities from 
control by turbulent and cabalistic cliques. And the same prin 
ciple applies to keeping up the distinctions between Nations ; 
that is, avoiding too much mixing of utterly heterogeneous 

4. Personal Conditions. 

\a) In General. We have already considered in part, the 
rights of the adoptive Nation, by comparing them with the rights 
of the Nation renounced. The remainder of this part of the 
subject, embraces the reasons for requiring important conditions 
of naturalization. These may be comprised in two divisions. 
One, is, to prevent errors that may arise out of the changed rela 
tions. The other, is, to procure and prove real fitness for the 
transfer to the new nationality. The means relied upon in the 
United States to accomplish these two objects, are, Length of 
residence, Oath of allegiance, and Legal Registration under Judi 
cial sanction. Something is said about good moral character, 
but nothing is really done about that qualification, except in case 
of having been publicly convicted and imprisoned lately for fel 
ony. Some of these questions will come up again for a little 
consideration, under the head of Qualification of Voters, in 
" Selections," under " Civil Government," and such of them as 
should come up there, are omitted here. 

(b) As to Preventing Errors. The naturalization laws of the 
United States are entirely right, in accounting that the citizen 
ship of a husband, of itself) naturalizes the wife ; but this is 
the opposite of oppressing women, and is hardly granting them 
that equality of rights which some are so loudly demanding. In 
regard to the difficulties about aliens holding real estate, when 
privileged to hold personal estate ; in a country like this where 
real estate confers no special political privileges, the distinction 
is utterly useless, and is a mere result of the retention of anti 
quated distinctions derived from the feudal law ; and the reten 
tion of such distinctions is mere pettifoggery. 

(c) As to Proving or Producing Fitness ; there is no evidence 


to belie v r e that oaths of allegiance are worth the few moments 
spent in making them, or the paper they are written upon. As 
to length of residence, IT is the most practicable reliance for pro 
ducing or proving, feelings and convictions suitable to the changed 
nationality. But we find that blind attachments to native land 
are, not only life-long, but even hereditary. It is probable, that a 
reasonable knowledge of the theory and principles of the society 
and government INTO which they had come, taught to and ex 
acted from foreigners, in order to naturalization, would be of 
great use. The nominal condition of good moral character,, ought 
to be made a real and vital condition. But even after all, the 
greatest difficulty, namely, the predilections of birth and early 
training, continue; and of these, the influences of early training 
and c&m-sympathy, are greater even than the mere fact of birth 

Special antipathy to any foreign government, is quite as fully 
an UNfitness for naturalization, as partiality for the adoptive one, 
is fitness ; and in fact the antipathy is, generally, only another 
form for home-partiality, or some other prejudice, under a dif 
ferent condition of things. But at any rate, the antipathy is 
productive of more evil than the partiality is of good ; because 
such is the general character of human nature that hatred is 
more active than friendship. 

Just as Nation is an eternal Unit of Society, so nationality is 
an abiding element of human character, and is not capable of 
being laid aside by an effort of will, nor by papers of natural 
ization. This is constantly proved by the fact, that some of the 
immigrants in the United States are continually at work endeav 
oring to influence the peoples, and revolutionize the governments 
from which they came. And then their quite' innocent and 
proper publications and " organs/ 7 and societies for mutual be 
nevolence, &c. have necessarily, although unintentionally,* the 
effect of constantly keeping alive their old partialities and their 
old animosities. If the immigrants came from a greater variety 
of countries, and in more equal proportions from each of them, 
their animosities, and the troubles and difficulties therefrom 
arising, would be apt to balance each other, and so be less, gen 

But the wants of the United States for population at first, 


and the inducements our country could present, were so strong, 
that an easy system of naturalization laws was natural, and al 
most inevitable, under the peculiar circumstances. All that can 
be done, is to educate their minds and hearts to truth and good 
ness ; and then, trust to their own sense of honor justice and 
kindness. All that we want is to preserve peace and justice. 
No clamor about patriotism or " native" land, should bias the 
matter. And it is well to receive foreigners as fast as we can 
digest them, politically, socially, and morally. 

!But we ought not to be in too great a hurry to parcel out all 
our public lands. In some of the states and territories, for 
eigners are allowed, even by the United States courts, political 
privileges before naturalization. But this is contrary to some of 
the fundamental principles of nationality. For nationality pre 
supposes that its Precincts are parts of itself, not only geograph 
ically, but personally. And this allowance therefore, is only 
another part of that system which aims to draw immigrants 
from foreign countries, and stimulates western emigration and 
acatteration, wildly, and prevents our unoccupied lands from 
being held forever by the public as landlord, and for the profit 
of all the people (see Spencer on the tenure of land), and puts 
them into the private ownership of the sort of gentlemen, whose 
energy for taking care of " number one" is not the least of ' their 
qualifications, and who are always ready to accept from the 
Nation, a few hundred square MILES of good land, to " develop 




OUR definition of Corporation is, that it is a something en 
tirely different from, either Precinct, or Nation, or borough or 
town, or any other Locality-government whatever. Just as is 
the case with churches ; the members of the same Locality be 
long to different churches ; and members of the same church, 
belong to different Localities : so there have been, and it is as 
conceivable that there may be, different civil governments for 
different Individuals in the same Precinct ; and that such Cor- 
poratiqns for civil self-government, may embrace members from 
two or more Precincts. But the main point of the difference is, 
that different Corporations for the self-government- of their own 
voluntary members, may be formed WITHIN THE SAME PRE 
CINCT ; just as persons may be members of different other vol 
untary societies therein. The members would select themselves, 
on the ground of metaphysical and moral resemblances or 
adaptations. There would be intermingling of all classes, indi 
vidually, personally and socially ; but the civil government for 
each Individual, would, in most cases, be administered by the 
civil or political corporation of which he was a member. Dif 
ferences bet ween -members of different Corporations, would have 
to be settled by arbitration, or in some other equitable manner, 
between the authorities of the Corporations, or in methods pre 
scribed by them. Nevertheless, matters strictly referring to the 
geographical concerns of Localities, whether of Precinct or Na 
tion, would have to be settled by those Local governments 
respectively; and only such matters; except that all FOREIGN 
affairs must be left also to the Nation. 

We have had more difficulty and more labor, over our article 



on Corporation, than over almost any other part of the work. 
One reason was, we had found no books that had afforded us 
any material aid. True ; Mr. Carey's Large edition, in vol. 3, 
chap. Hi. 3, pp. 415 to 423, has eight or nine excellent pages 
upon the subject, in a miscellaneous way: but unfortunately, 
these have been entirely omitted from the Abridged edition, (see 
its chap. xliv. 2 and 3), which is the one I have generally 
used. The reader is referred to the Large edition itself. Calvin 
Blanchard, an old chum of Greeley, has also published consid 
erably on this subject; but I have never seen any of his writings 
thereon ; and as represented in the New York Tribune, his the 
ory is very different from mine, as will appear in chap. ii. 2, 
ensuing. Also, a Mr. Sinnickson has written some little, but 
well, upon this subject ; yet not until my article was pretty well 
under way, at least I did not meet with anything from him pre 
viously, and only a few scraps, then. 

Another reason of the difficulty and labor qver this subject of 
CORPORATION, and this latter principally, was the fact, that 
the variety of possible or even useful Corporations, is almost 
indefinitely great; and even the variety of the political ones, 
which are the kind we design specially to treat, is also so great, 
that real difficulty arises, both as to the classifications of the 
whole, and also as to the kinds to select for illustration, to 
enable the reader, without undue complication or prolixity, to 
have, both a glimpse of the whole field, and yet a sight of 
minutiae sufficient to be intelligible and unequivocal. It was 
also desirable, to endeavor to avoid such a repulsive dryness, as 
would insure there would be no readers of the article at all. 
Hence, it has been deemed best, to arrange its Main Divisions 
or Parts, in a rather different order from what has usually been 
pursued by us. Accordingly, the Argument, Anticipations in 
history, and the Anticipations by some other Social Scientists, 
and some formal Arguments for the Right and Expediency, 
are placed first: Then, the General Survey of them, according 
to their nature ; the Definitions and Classifications : And last 
of all, are placed the more Exact Investigations of the general 
theory, rising gradually to the most general conceptions of the 
subject, and then falling to the more practical ones. 

In this First Main Division, which we call the ARGUMENT, 


we only give a few Anticipations, and a few miscellaneous evi 
dences for the rights ; and a few of the miscellaneous advan 
tages, whether common to it with the Precinct, or peculiar to it 
alone. We give these miscellaneous arguments in this Main 
Division, simply because they seem out 'of place, in the two sub 
sequent ones. 

Many arguments for Corporations, are adducible also, either 
for Precinct or for Nation ; and are thus common to two Ele 
ments. Those common to PRECINCT and Corporation, will first 
and frequently be treated. But for those common to NATION 
and Corporation, the reader is referred back to that Element, 
namely Book III. ; or forward to the investigation of " Corpora 
tions exercising inherent political functions," as treated in the 
Third Main Division of this present Element or " Book." 







1. In Religion and Morals. 

The earliest Corporations we find in history, whether con 
nected with the civil power, or independent of it, are the 
religious organizations. Bretano expressly says, they followed 
immediately after the " frith guilds"; and the frith guilds are 
essentially our elementary Precincts, and not merely artificial or 
deliberative Corporations. And the religious organizations of 
most countries and ages, are either virtual or actual Corpo 

The tribe of Levi was a legally instituted national Corpora 
tion. It occupied a very different position, from that of all the 
churches in the United States, taken collectively ; and different 


a^o from any modern national church. Its position was like 
that of the bishops of the Middle Ages, possessing secular 
dominions. Hence, it exercised civil authority, by virtue of its 
religious office. The Levites, besides possessing the dignities 
and exemptions enjoined as religious officials, were also the 
ordinary civil judges, of the country around the numerous cities 
allotted to them. ' 

The Christian churches have always been Corporations. Just 
as the reformation and freedom in the churches, in the 16th 
century, were, as Guizot says, the precursors and first steps of 
reformation and freedom in the intellectual world ; so also the 
commencement and persistence of independent Corporations, by 
churches, may be the precursors and first steps of civil govern 
ment by Corporations in general. 

The monastic institutions of the Middle Ages, possessed a very 
considerable degree of municipal power upon their own territo 
ries; and were also allowed more or less political, as well as 
ecclesiastical representation, in the Nations. Of Monasticism, 
Comte (Pos. Phil. 608) says : " We must also recognize the 
political bearing of the monastic institutions, which certainly 
were one of the most indispensable elements of the vast organ 
ism, * * * the cradle whence issued by anticipation, the chief 
Christian conceptions, dogmatic and practical ; * * * the founda 
tion whence issued the reformation of orders ; a provision for 
the beneficial exercise of political genius, which it has been im 
possible to appreciate since its inevitable decay. * : The 
Catholic system could not have preserved * * * the attribute 
of generality, * * * if these contemplative train-bands, who 
were placed by their very nature at the universal point of view, 
had not been forever reproducing direct thought, while exhibit 
ing an example of independence which thereby became more 
generally practicable." 

It is a Corporation of the most respectable citizens of Gothen 
burg, Sweden, who are now executing the most successful plan 
against intemperance, ever devised. They pay all its profits into 
the city treasury, appoint all the retailers, furnish them all the 
liquor at wholesale, allow no profit whatever to be made by the 
retailer, out of the strong liquors sold, but only the profit out 
of malt liquors, coffee, tea, cigars, and victuals, which they are 


required to keep on hand, and to sell reasonably. Also the 
Corporation requires the sales-rooms to be pleasant places ; and 
does not allow any liquor to be sold either on credit or on 

Our respectable Indian commissioners might succeed as well 
as the Swedish Temperance-friends, if only they were duly 
organized into a suitable Corporation. But otherwise, the 
" rings" against them are too strong for them. 
2. In Politics and Parties. 

All the political parties, great and small, are virtual Corpora 
tions ; so also are the organized " rings" and cliques within these 
other organizations, whether of church or state. Several of the 
" United States" were started by, or soon transformed into, Cor 
porations. Indeed, all Corporations, when they become great and 
important, are drawn more or less into politics, even if not in 
tentionally so. But generally, they turn their realized greatness 
voluntarily, into political channels. Even the Temperance- 
societies and the Peace-churches, sooner or later, and more or 
less, find themselves acting according to this tendency. 

Carey has enumerated some valuable Corporations of antiquity, 
to which the reader is referred ; namely his Large Edition, vol. 
3, chap. Hi. 3. 

The legislative and judicial authorities in the Middle Ages, 
were cosmopolitan. They were Councils of virtual compromise, 
acknowledging the representation of Corporations such as we 
propose in the latter part of this article ; and some remnants of 
which, still continue. The parliaments or national assemblies of 
the European governments, contained representatives of the Free 
Cities, the Churches, the Monasteries, and the Universities. But 
these were in such small proportion, as to avail but little before 
the grand controlling power of the Great Localities. But even 
so far as these corporate representatives did retain real power, 
the power itself gradually ceased to be free in its operations ; 
besides, the choice of the representatives also ceased to be free. 
But worse than all, the Corporations themselves became anti 
quated; and the system contained no principle of recognizing 
Corporations as such, nor of reorganizing them ; and therefore 
new kinds as demanded by progress, were not formed ; and of 
course, when the Corporations ceased to have general political 



value, their rights lost their defenders, even among the un 
learned laity. Nevertheless, those legislatures were sufficiently 
analogous to these we propose, to entitle them to be here cited. 

Several of the earliest and most prominent attempts at settle 
ment, in the United States, were made by 'actually chartered 
Corporations. Such was the case with that at Jamestown, which 
was the earliest of all. The Jamestown Corporation was divided 
into two companies, each having its own part of the territory 
to manage. This Corporation, eleven years subsequently, al 
lowed its colonists to elect delegates to a legislative assembly, 
whilst retaining itself the appointment of its governor and select 
council ; but in a few years more the Corporation dissolved : 
and that was the origin of democracy in the United States. 
Then the "Plymouth Corporation" obtained, in 1620, the grant 
of the United States, between Maryland and Canada ; and from 
that Corporation the "Pilgrim Fathers" obtained their lands; 
whence came the grants of Massachusetts, Rhode Island and 
Connecticut. The settlements at and near Philadelphia, were 
begun by a Swedish Corporation in 1638, many years before 
Penn came. The first settlements in New York were made 
in 1610, by a Holland Corporation, "the Dutch West India 
Company." And the principal impetus to the settlement of 
Georgia, was given in 1732, by the charter of incorporation 
under the leadership of Oglethorpe. It must be admitted, that 
all these Corporations ultimately failed of their corporate de 
signs; partly because the colonists had but little gratitude to 
the Corporations who had brought them over from the Old 
Country, and given them lands ; but chiefly, because, being for 
eign and non-resident Corporations, they were no more able to 
govern the Colonies, than were the respective kings, or other 
civil authorities, of the countries whence they had come. And 
that the colonists were able to throw off the yoke of the Cor 
porations, so much easier and sooner, than the yoke of the kings, 
and that the Corporations yielded so to the force of circumstances, 
is proof of their value, if only rightly constructed. And all that 
kept them from yielding more readily, seems to have been the 
hope of regaining their financial losses therein, an opposition 
that might have been easily and justly met, by the colonists 
compensating them fairly. 


3. In Education. 

The Universities and Colleges of modern Europe, possessed 
for centuries, a limited degree of municipal authority. The 
word "collegium" itself meant association, and included the 
ideas both of partnership and Corporation. " The word univer 
sity, in the code Justinian, is used to designate a Corporation. 
Thus there were in Rome, in the 7th and 8th centuries, univer 
sities of tailors, bakers, &c." (App. Cyclop, xv. 836). The uni 
versities soon found it necessary to have some sort of municipal 
government, by instituting their members into Corporations for 
that purpose. For administering their authority, the univer 
sities were subdivided, sometimes into colleges, and sometimes 
divisions included several different nationalities. It was this 
necessity, perhaps, quite as much as respect for learning, that 
caused the universities to be allowed various kinds and amounts 
of political power, both representative and judicial. 

Several of the European medical colleges, "have both a power 
of police over matters pertaining to the public health, and the 
privilege of examining candidates for medical degrees/' and 
without whose authority they cannot practice. (App. Cyclop, 
v. 468). 

Oxford University in England, and so also Cambridge, is a 
federal Corporation, consisting of several distinct colleges, each 
of which, within certain limitations, is an independent organiza 
tion, having its own private property, and having control over 
its own students within its own boundaries. 

Of . the Universities, Comte (Pos. Phil. p. 726) says: "At a 
time when national divergences were still very great, and when 
the Catholic bond was dissolved ; the Universities threw open 
their doors to foreigners ; so as to mark the new speculative class 
as European, and to afford the best testimony to the cosmopolitan 
character of the scientific spirit." 

Most of the communes and communities, at least the Protestant 
ones, are and have been, without actual charters, but yet are vir 
tual Corporations, exercising a limited degree of governmental 
power. And they may as well be enumerated here, under edu 
cation, as anywhere elsej because their principal use to the world 
thus far, has been to teach by example 'and precept, what can be 

318 BK - IV - CORPORATION. I. I. I. 

done in their way; and thus they are instances of what Corpo 
rations have done in education. 

4. In Trade. 

Plutarch relates, that in the early ages of ancient Rome, Numa 
organized the citizens into societies or Corporations, according to 
their occupations. Some of the modern savans, however, say that 
Plutarch was wrong in this story ; but how our savans should 
have so much more certain knowledge about it, than Plutarch, 
is not so easy to see. But it is very easy to see, how this very 
variance from the present customs and ideas, might raise doubts 
as to the ancient facts. According to Plutarch, (App. Cyclop, 
v. 467) : " The original design was to prevent the danger of any 
general conspiracy, by x organizing separate assemblies, festivals, 
and finances, for different portions of citizens." But in fact, 
these institutions had rather the opposite tendency, and became 
so disorderly that they were repeatedly suppressed by the Roman 
government. But in modern times, we find such organizations 
arising spontaneously. All our trades, wholesale and retail, 
"Employers and Employes, are forming themselves into partial 
Corporations for their particular self-interested purposes. 

The Guilds of .Europe in the Middle Ages, remnants of which 
continue to this day, were virtually, political Corporations. Of 
these Guilds, Comte (p. 695) says: they "incorporated the 
members of each craft, and protected Individual-industry at 
first; however they might oppress it at last." Bretano, in his 
history of Guilds, says : " The trade-unions of the present day, 
were the successors of the ' craft-guilds' of the Middle Ages. 
These again succeeded to the town-guilds or guilds merchant, 
which were local rather than professional, and included the com 
mercial rather than the producing class. These were preceded 
by a yet more ancient sort of guilds, the religious or social 
guilds ; for they were a mingling of both characters ; and before 
these, came the original guilds, the frith-guilds of the Anglo- 
Saxons, which seem to have been associations of neighbors for 
mutual help and defence" , [namely, Our Precincts]. " Within 
the craft-guilds, the institution of apprenticeship grew up. This 
institution was then accompanied with much formality; for it 
was not merely the. introduction to a business, but to CITIZEN 


Of merchants making their own laws, Comte (p. 694) says : 
" During the medieval period, when industrial communities legis 
lated independently, before the formations of the greater polities, 
there were commercial tribunals and regulations, which do great 
honor to the Hanseatic merchants, whose jurisdiction contrasts 
very favorably with others of that age." And we add, that the 
old Dutch Bank notes, founded upon and representing always, 
the exact amounts of coin actually deposited and reserved, 
were the only legitimate paper-currency, the world has yd seen : 
and, the departure from which system, has entailed a financial 
curse upon the world, which, in all probability, will continue to 
weigh heavily upon it, as long as the ordinary course of human 
things shall endure. 

The greater part of the mercantile law in England, may in 
spirit be regarded as the work of Corporations ; for it is chiefly 
a digest of mercantile usages of late date. Mr. Mill, while 
strongly condemning the common law of England, yet com 
mends the mercantile part of it highly (Pol. Econ. p. 534), as 
follows: " Fortunately for the prosperity of England, the 
greater part of the mercantile law is comparatively modern, and 
was made by the tribunals, by the simple process, of recognizing 
and giving force of law to, the usages which, from motives of 
convenience, had grown up among merchants themselves ; so 
that this part of the law at least, was substantially made by 
those who were most interested in its goodness." 

Of this class of Corporations, the most interesting and the 
most hopeful kind, are those which we often find men sponta 
neously forming, in order to avoid the corruptions and ineffi 
ciency of the ordinary law ; and thus to perform spontaneously 
and very satisfactorily, the particular functions for which they 
are organized ; for instance, associations such as the Boards of 
Brokers, Boards of Trade, Chambers of Commerce, and vari 
ous kinds of Trade-Exchanges, Trades-Unions, and Employers' 
Unions, which are found more or less in all the large cities of 
the world. 

5. Cosmopolitan and Migratory. 

Several Corporations are cosmopolitan, and almost world-wide. 
The Jewish people have ceased from being a Nation, for 2000 
years ; yet have continued to live as a virtual world-wide Cor- 

320 BK - IV - CORPORATION. I. I. I. 

poration. The Catholic Church is another cosmopolitan Corpo 
ration. So also are the Moravian and Quaker Churches ; also, 
several of the great Foreign Missionary Societies. So also are 
the Free Masons, and perhaps some other Societies. 

Then also there are various migratory or TRAVELLING Cor 
porations. The settlers and colonists on new territories, are 
always virtually, and often actually, incorporated Companies. 
Sailors and soldiers are travelling Corporations, both virtually 
and organically. The Gypsies also are a notable exemplification, 
exercising politico-governmental functions among themselves, by 
voluntary organization; entirely independent of all other "civil 
powers"; and almost entirely abstract from particular Locations, 
whether Precinct, Nation, or even Continent 

Some of the Corporations established for making foreign set 
tlements, are also cosmopolitan, and almost world-wide, in their 
nature. The British and Dutch East India Companies, begun 
for trade, exercised political government, and produced settle 
ments. So also several other organizations, which in former 
centuries helped to settle the newly discovered Continent. Cali 
fornia received many of its best early settlers from the East, by 
means of Corporations ; and now it is receiving its vast addi 
tions from the " Celestial" Empire, by the same means. All the 
classes of society and all the Social Circles, are VIRTUAL Corpo 
rations, and may be enumerated under the head of cosmopolitan, 
as well as anywhere else. 

Chivalry was another cosmopolitan institution. Comte (p. 
621), says : * * * " Mohammedanism had, even before the Cru 
sades, originated something like the noble associations, by which 
Chivalry affords a natural corrective of insufficient Individual 
protection," * * * yet " their free rise is attributable to the Mid 
dle- Age-spirit." The examples of Chivalry show some of the 
principles, whereupon the peace-men may build their theories of 
the most absolute non-resistance : because there will rise up FOR 
SUCH, when oppressed by fighting men, other fighting men, actu 
ated by mingled duty, compassion, combativeness, and love of 
glory. And for such, the Corporation-method is the best. 



1. The Ancients and the Idealists. 

Plato, in his Model Republic, bases his whole theory of gov 
ernment, upon the conception of a Corporation. For, as Spencer 
(111. Prog. 391), says, his (Plato's) ideal of a body politic, is to 
be put together by men, in parts, as a watch might be. 

The Scripture places the Corporation of the Christian Church, 
on a par with a Kingdom or Nation. It is often, in the Gospels, 
called the Kingdom of God. And in Matt., xxi. 43, is expressly , 
called A NATION. And the Prophet Daniel speaks of it, as a 
kingdom which should ultimately absorb all the other kingdoms 
of the Earth. 

Hobbes, not only implies but actually asserts, the corporate 
nature of bodies politic, and this, notwithstanding his whole 
system is based upon the analogy of society to a living animal. 
" l BY ART/ he says, ' is created that great Leviathan, called a 
Commonwealth. 7 And he even goes so far as to compare the 
supposed social contract, from which a society suddenly origi 
nates, to the creation of a man by the divine fiat." (See Spencer's 
111. Prog. 391.) 

In fact, the general principle that pervaded most writings on 
Society and Government, in all ages previous to the utterance of 
Mclntosh, that " constitutions are not made, but grow," was 
the idea of virtual Corporations. But in our day, the principle 
is being ignored in all directions. Even Spencer, whose theory 
would be greatly aided by our principle of Corporations, says, 
that the fact " that this Apothegm of Mclntosh should have 
been quoted and requoted as it has been, shows how profound 
has been the ignorance of Social . Science." But how he can 
reconcile this, with that other great doctrine of his, namely, 
" that all science is but the extension of common knowledge," 
we do not see. Yet perhaps we are in the darkness that " per 
vaded through all previous time" ; for we are convinced, that if 
hitherto it has been true, that " constitutions grow but are not 
made," it is high time they were really made. 

Also, all other of those writers who have proposed ideals of 
government, (as Sir Thomas More, Fourier, and so on,) proceed 
on the same virtual Corporation-Hypothesis of government. 



Even the framers of the constitution of the United States, pro 
ceeded on the same hypothesis. The whole theory of " delega 
tion of rights/' as the origin or essence of government, proceeds 
upon the same hypothesis. 

2. The Modern Scientists. 

(a) Spencer. That all civil governments, whether of the Na 
tion or Precinct, partake of the nature of a Corporation", seems 
indeed almost to have occurred to Spencer. Thus, (111. of Prog. 
396) : " The last and perhaps the most important distinction" 
between an animal and society, " is, that while in the body of an 
animal, only a special tissue is endowed with feeling in a so 
ciety, all the members are endowed with feeling." Thus, the 
Principle of Political Corporation seems to have almost occurred 
to him, but in such an indirect and merely figurative way, as to 
have passed him by, without any serious attention. Even his 
whole idea of government, originally was that of a sort of Cor 
poration, and seemed to allow no natural, instinctive, spontane 
ous, nor elementary rights to society as such ; nor scarcely any 
other rights, than if it were only a voluntary Corporation." 
(Continuing from Westminster Review, Jan. 1860, we quote): 
" The community as a whole has no general or CORPORATE con 
sciousness, distinct from those of its components. This is an 
everlasting reason, why the welfare of citizens cannot rightly be 
sacrificed to some supposed benefit, of the State ; but why, on the 
other hand, the State must be regarded as existing solely for 
the benefit of citizens. The CORPORATE life must here be sub 
servient to the life of the parts, instead of the life of the parts 
being subservient to the CORPORATE life." 

Again : Spencer has laid down the broad PRINCIPLES, in a 
general way, whereby the Individual-man and Corporations, 
react upon each other: the principles whereby Corporations 
would provide for and cure, the evils which their own system 
might give rise to. Although, it seems, that Spencer himself 
had chiefly in his mind, the organization of Nations, Provinces, 
Geographical formations, &c. Yet he has repeatedly pointed out 
the reciprocal actions, of man, on his surroundings ; and then 
of those surroundings, on man ; and then of the changed man, 
again on his surroundings; and then, of those surroundings, 
again on the man. And these reciprocities of influence reach 


their climax, of degree, kind, and importance, in the reactions 
of human SOCIETIES or ASSOCIATIONS, upon each other. There 
fore we may infer, that these reactions and reciprocal influences, 
will "evolve" their greatest results, that is to say, will do their 
HIGHEST work, in CORPORATIONS. Spencer calls these recip 
rocal influences or powers, " Factors of Social Phenomena" ; and 
those of the influences which are above the physical, and iray 
be termed moral and metaphysical ; he would call the "super- 
organic" Factors. But, let us quote, and allow him to speak for 

Spencer in Principles of Sociology Part I. chap. ii. 13, 
says: "Recognizing the primary truth, that social phenomena 
depend, in part on the natures of the Individuals, and in part on 
the forces the Individuals are subject to ; we see that these two 
fundamentally-distinct sets of factors, with which social changes 
commence, become progressively involved with other sets, as 
social changes advance." 

And again 1 2, he says : " During social evolutions, these 
influences are ever modifying Individuals, and modifying so 
ciety; while being modified by both. They gradually form 
what we may consider, either, as a non-vital part of the society 
itself, or else as an additional environment, which eventually be 
comes even more important than the original environments, so 
much more important, that there arises the possibility of carry 
ing on a high type of social life, under inorganic and organic 
conditions, which originally would have prevented it." 

And again 11, he says: "Yet a further derivative factor 
of extreme importance, remains. I mean the influence of the 
sitper-organic environment, the action and reaction between a 
society, and neighboring societies. * * * For I may here, in 
passing, briefly indicate the fact, 'to be hereafter exhibited in 
full, that while the industrial organization of a society, is 
mainly determined by its inorganic and organic environments; 
its governmental organization is mainly determined by its super- 
organic environment, by the action of those adjacent societies 
with which it carries on the struggle for existence." 

If the reader should refer to Spencer's Part I., above men 
tioned, he would find considerable said about the units of soci 
ety, the social units, &c. ; and might suppose Mr. Spencer had 


some idea like our Six Units. But such is not the case. For, 
Mr. Spencer uses this word Units, ONLY in reference to the IN 
DIVIDUAL : and without explicit definition, that conception runs 
all through it. See 6, 13, 14, 21, 22, 24, 25: and all along; 
thus, in his three great divisions (in separate chapters), "the 
physical, emotional, and intellectual, traits of primitive man": 
also 49, and so on. But although he has no reference to any 
other unit than the Individual; yet such is the abstract and 
general nature of his thought and language on society, and so 
true is the type-theory, of the Individual really being type of all 
the five Units above it, and so true also is our theory that all the 
Six Units are types of CORPORATION, that what he says, (all 
along in his " Data of Sociology"), of the Individual -man, is 
true also of all our Seven Fundamental Elements of society, 
and therefore is true also of Corporation. And that celebrated 
generalist, has probably, in some other places, had indistinct and 
undeveloped reference, to such voluntary association as we would 
call Corporation. In all the foregoing or other references to Mr. 
Spencer, I mean nothing else than the profoundest respect for 
him : yet still it is possible, that the idea of Political Corpora 
tions possessing fundamental and inherent political functions, 
may have been (as I suppose), dearly " differentiated" for the first 
time, by me. 

(b) Guyot. Guyot also, without knowing it, or without calling 
special attention to it ; anticipates the necessity of Political Cor 
porations; where, after praising the Greek civilization for its 
Individuality and Precinct-independence, but condemning it for 
its lack of Nationality ; he says, (p. 309) : " The Greek princi 
ple is individuality, and not association ; and this is still further 
determined by the race, by the tribe, that is, by nature, AND 
NOT BY VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT. THIS political and social 
work is a NEW work, and is entrusted to a new country and a 
new people :" evidently meaning, this business of making gov 
ernments by " voluntary agreement." 

(c) Mill Mill, Pol. Econ. p. 542, sets forth the rights of Cor 
porations, so far as " commerce or industry is concerned." But 
the same language appears to be equally true, when applied to 
any kind of Corporation, to perform almost any function, which 
either Individuals or society ought to be allowed freedom to ac- 


complish at all : " If a number of persons choose to associate for 
carrying on any operation of commerce or industry, agreeing 
among themselves, and .announcing to those with whom they 
deal, that the members of the association do not undertake to be 
responsible beyond the amount of the subscribed capital ; is 
there any reason that the law should raise objections to this pro 
ceeding, and should impose on them the UNLIMITED responsi 
bility which they disclaim ? For whose sake ? Not for that 
of the partners themselves ; for it is they whom the limitation 
of responsibility benefits and protects. It must therefore be for 
the sake of third parties, namely, those who may have transac 
tions with the association, and to whom it may run in debt, 
beyond what the subscribed capital suffices to pay. But nobody 
is obliged to deal with the association ; still less is any one 
obliged to give it unlimited credit. The class of persons with 
whom such associations have dealings, are in general, perfectly 
capable of taking care of themselves ; and there seems no reason 
that the law should be more careful of their interest, than they 
will themselves .be ; provided no false representation is held out, 
and they are aware from the first, what they have to trust to." 

(d) Carey. Mr. Carey, in Hunt's Merchants 7 Magazine, May, 
1845, speaking of a Corporation of Industry, says: "Its' oper 
ations partake in some respects of THE NATURE OF THOSE OP 
GOVERNMENTS." Again : " A careful examination of the sys 
tems of the several States, can scarcely, we think, fail to con 
vince the reader, of the advantage resulting from permitting 
men to determine among themselves, the terms upon which they 
will associate; and allowing the associations that may be formed, 
to contract with the public, as to the terms upon which they will 
trade together, whether of the limited or unlimited liability of 
the partners." And this remark, like Mr. Mill's, is as true 
when applied to Corporations formed for social and for general 
governmental purposes, as to those for any special governmental, 
or for any other purpose. If not ; then for whose benefit is the 


(e) Comte. Comte (Pos. Phil. p. 765), consciously expects a 
spiritual, a super-material authority IN society ; and that it must 
finally become instituted, have " its political organization, * * * 
and be regularly constituted." His type evidently is the church. 


Whence we may infer, that he looks to some kind of intellectual 
Corporation as the new super-material power. Again, more 
pointedly (p. 787) he says : " Such thinkers may form a posi 
tive Council, under one form or another; and act, either by 
reviewing and renovating all human conceptions, or by insti 
tuting seats of education for the advancement of positive knowl 
edge, and for the training of fit coadjutors; or by regulating 
the application of the system, through unremitting instruction 
of all kinds ; and even by philosophical intervention in the 
political conflicts, which must arise till the old social action is 

(/) Ballon. The first view that we have found in any writer, 
of a theory of Corporations, approximating ours, is in Adin 
Ballou's " Christian Socialism." We however had not understood 
it, nor even seen his book, until after our theory had suggested 
itself. The two theories are very different. His is a modifica 
tion and improvement of and upon Fourierism, and all the other 
proposed social reorganizations ; but ours is a development from 
the Tribe-theory, of the origin of civil government ; and arose, 
because it was found that the Social Circle and the Precinct, by 
themselves, without the Corporation, did not express the whole 
of the action of the Tribe-element, in modern society. See Bk. I. 
Pt. II. Ch. VIII., and Bk. IV. M.D. II. S. D.L. Ch. I. and II. 

Our theory originates with the rights of Individuals, Families, 
and Precincts, according to the German and ancient Greek idea. 
But Mr. Ballou's theory goes unconsciously upon the assumption 
of the Roman idea, of centralism, and of government descending 
from the greater to the less. The same " seven identical circles" 
are to be in < all his Corporations alike ; namely, " the adoptive, 
unitive, preceptive, communitive, expansive, charitive, and pa- 
rentive." But these circles are not to be incorporated, nor even 
to have any permanent general organization as such. "This," 
says he, " precludes all the evils of caste" &c. 

And what can we think of a civil polity for the United States, 
or for any other republican government, which would require 
all its members to abstain entirely from participation in civil and 
political affairs ? And what also can we think of requiring of 
its members, the belief of such a subtlety as the doctrine of Uni 
versal Salvation, as one of the "principles of theological truth." 


fundamental to the constitution of society ? Such things might 
be admissible, as repetitions of the small exclusive communities 
that have so often been tried, but are hardly worthy of a place 
in Corporations which propose, as his do, to entirely absorb all 
the functions of civil society. His Corporations are to keep so 
much aloof from established governments, that they are not even 
to obtain charters, or legal acts of incorporation, (but he takes 
care to say, his trustees "shall take the utmost care that all titles 
to Heal Estate shall be so expressed, executed, and RECORDED, 
as effectually to preclude all ulterior controversies"; and further 
more, "shall execute and cause to be recorded in the Registry of 
Deeds for the County, a DECLARATION OF TRUST" &c.). No 
force is to be used ; except to compel miserably unhappy married 
people, to live together: Inflexibly as in the Roman Church, or 
even more so, for there is no Pope there, to grant "dispensations." 
"Divorce," says he, "shall NEVER be allowable, except for adul 
tery CONCLUSIVELY proved." 

His division of Corporations, into two kinds, "Parochial and 
Rural," is very good. By " Rural" he means what we should 
call Precinct-Corporation ; or, the contrast between Parochial 
and Rural, might be expressed by the words, Total and Partial, 
or Social and Local. Then again, his division of Corporations, 
into "common-stock and joint-stock," is also good; "joint-stock" 
meaning regular share-holders' companies ; and "common stock" 
meaning unlimited-property-communism. But he does not seem 
to conceive of the possibility, of so modifying and combining 
these two kinds of societies, as to give rise to a third kind, which 
might partly be a compromise between them. In other words, 
he does not conceive of the idea, that property holders could 
really give their incomes into the common fund ; and yet retain, 
or have allowed to them, the privilege of voting in proportion 
to such contributions, as if private shares of stock in joint-stock 
companies. It must be remarked here, that he calls all these 
different organizations, " communities" ; and the totality of them 
all, fie calls a republic. 

And we may add here also, that if worthy Corporations would 
apply to the civil governments, and obtain complete charters and 
independent rights ; such rights would probably be respected in 
ALL after times, whether by friends or enemies. Perhaps such 


Corporations, of a limited communistic kind, are yet to be the 
principal arks, whereby "the elect" are to be saved from the 
deluge of LEVELLING fire, that may perhaps sweep over the 
world, before many centuries have elapsed. But as far as such 
independent and peace rights, can be obtained from govern 
ments, so far of course, the Corporations are bound to abstain 
from participation in the affairs of the enclosing government. 
And this is just, what our theory, in part, insists upon, namely, 
the duty of civil governments to GRANT, but not for societies to 
take without permission. 

Mr. Ballou does not use our word Corporation, but w r e use 
this word, all along (in speaking of his theory, as also of our 
own); the better to show the points of connection between the 
two theories, as we desire to point out their connections, as well 
as their differences. 

Mr. Ballou's ideal was, to transform all the local governments of 
the whole Nation, into Corporations of persons who should adopt 
ALL his fundamental principles. And a part of this ideal seems 
to have been, that its complete success would ultimately dispense 
Avith the use of a national government altogether. But this is a 
fundamental error : the Corporation cannot displace nationality, 
because the Corporation is a part of the Tribe-element, and 
therefore cannot fulfill at most, more than all the functions of 
the Tribe-principle, and therefore at most, can only fulfill the 
functions of, or displace, Social Circle and Precinct. 

(g) Calvin Blanchard. As a set-off to Mr. Ballou's views, let 
us print some of the dying words of Mr. Blanchard, the Posi- 
tivist, an old chum of Greeley. He says, "The ' Philosophers' 
and ' Literati' will hardly believe my asseveration, that within a 
few years past, I. have sent forth among unassuming, common 
sense people, books and pamphlets to this purport, written by 
myself, to the extent of more than 250 thousand. * :: * Aided 
by the social architects who have preceded me, I have fully dis 
covered and demonstrated, that the whole world will be united 
under the government of those who will be guided by the con 
stitution manifested in Human Nature, and by the laws with 
which they will thoroughly acquaint themselves, in relation 
thereto, to the entire exclusion of all other so-called constitu 
tions and laws. * * * By studying the said true constitution 


and laws, they will find out and put into practice, the great Art 
of Arts, whereby the perfect happiness of every then and thence 
forth human being, will be completely secured ; as they will also 
find out, that only by continuing that practice, can they secure 
their own happiness. So intimately are Mankind connected, 
they form one Unitary Being. * * : The Science of Sciences, 
and Art of Arts, the crowning triumph of Nature through 
Art, will be the organization of the whole world, including it 
and all its inhabitants, in one Joint Stock" [not common stock] 
"Corporation, that will guarantee perfect happiness to every 
human being who shall then exist, or thenceforth come into 
existence." (!) 

The great objections to this view of Mr. Blanchard, are, 
(1) that it entirely ignores two essential elements of society, 
namely, Precinct and Nation. Corporation, we admit, is ca 
pable of fulfilling nearly all, but yet not quite all, of the func 
tions of civil government. And (2) that it seems to give too 
much prominence to the joint-stock principle, as compared with 
communism. (3) The greatest error of all, is, in supposing that 
any one Corporation could answer all the wants of even any one 
person. The great good that Corporations can accomplish, is 
obtainable by their multiplicity, and by the consequent choices 
which they would thus present to everybody, everywhere. It is 
even possible, that Corporations may rise in generality, so as to 
become really w T orld-wide ; but not possible nor desirable, that 
any ONE or even any very few Corporations, should absorb all 
the others. See this train of thought pursued, in the Third 
Main Division of this article. 

(h) School of the French Empire. In the school .of higher 
studies of the French Empire, (says the Journal of Social 
Science of the Am. Assoc. for 1869), there has been established 
so lately as January, 1869, in " the section of economic sciences," 
a course which includes the history " of commercial and indus 
trial ASSOCIATIONS." These of course, virtually are Corpora 
tions ; and in Europe, pretty " close" ones, too. 




When writers say that citizens have full right to meet and 
form laws for THEMSELVES ; they SAY, for themselves, but MEAN, 
for each other; and so, they entirely confuse Individual-obe 
dience with social obedience. What is wanted is, some legal 
authority ; not that would give one class of persons, control over 
another, nor even one class, control over its own members, with 
out their consent; but that would only give classes and societies, 
control over their own members, so far as each Individual or 
Family had first joined any such society, and promised obe 
dience to it, as the civil government he or they would choose 
and prefer, first among all the possible or convenient ones that 
were within their opportunities. 

Some Corporations have one kind of power, and others 
another kind; but within only voluntary limits. Churches 
rule partly over marriage and divorce, partly over morality, 
and partly over benevolence. Classes and Social Circles rule 
partly over the same vital points of discipline. And the great 
fraternal beneficial societies, as Free Masons, Odd Fellows, 
Orders of Temperance, &c., also exercise their respective shares 
of authority. The Trade-Corporations, whether of the wage- 
classes or of the capitalists, govern their respective matters, by 
rules fast settling into legality. The municipal law cannot put 
down the trade-unions, and has even to acknowledge the cus 
toms of merchants, as constituting "the Law Merchant"; and 
so on. And then the Municipal boroughs exercise the local mu 
nicipal authority, over a few external matters, other than those 
which pertain to the geographical economy ; for this geograph 
ical economy, in any case, must be left to some local authority, 
until indeed every Precinct itself becomes a moral unit, by nat 
ural segregation, in which case the difference between abstract 
Corporation, and local borough, would become eliminated. 
Now, what our theory of Corporations, asks and argues for, is, 


the right and freedom for, and the expediency and practicability 
of, actually introducing Corporations which shall accomplish 
several or all of these functions, in ONE organization ; yet, with 
out destroying the freedom of the Individual, because he would 
always be left free to change his membership to any other Cor 
poration that would freely accept him. What we ask for then, 
is, the institution of whole Corporations for whole uses, instead 
of or beside, only fractional Corporations for only fractional uses. 

There is an analogy here, to the argument in Precinct, Part 
I. Chap. II. 1. Various Counties and Districts are found ex 
isting, and possessing separate special and local " privileges," as 
of liquor, dogs, sheep, police, &c. ; and we asked for every Dis 
trict to be allowed all these privileges at once. So also there 
are various Corporations, as we have seen, for securing separate 
special rights ; one Corporation for one right ; and another for 
another right. And we ask, that these and other Corporations 
may be allowed, which shall combine provisions for guarding 
and enforcing as many rights in each one Corporation, as its 
members choose voluntarily and fairly, to unite in it for. And 
such Corporations, therefore, would take cognizance of the 
" Rights of Persons," as well as also of the " Rights of Things." 

Nevertheless, our Corporation-theory does not conflict with 
the doctrine, that Nations and Precincts are moral personalities ; 
but the theory affords the only method, whereby that doctrine 
can be justified in principle; or that can sustain the action of 
the local authorities as Units, in the face of the world's modern 
doctrine of liberty, and the rights of the Individual. Either 
the right of special Corporations, must be admitted to entitle to 
exception from the local authority, in questions of vital im 
portance, wherein Individuals object ; or else the doctrine will be 
forced upon us, that all governments are only voluntary Cor 
porations, subject alone, only and entirely, to the stipulated con 
ditions of those who are members ; for the idea of " subjects" is 
passing away, with that absolutism of which it was a part. 


Corporations, according to Blackstone, are treated in law, 
merely as artificial persons. Here is wheVe the old theory of 
law, seems utterly to lack the capacity of appropriating the new 


theory, or the new organs of society. By the old law, a Corpo 
ration is regarded somewhat as a slave used to be; that is, as 
an Individual without any natural rights; nay, the case is still 
harder than the slave's, for the very existence itself of a Corpo 
ration, and not only its rights, is supposed to be derived from 
statute law. No progress can be made, of any great impor 
tance, until law proceeds on the entirely opposite presumption, 
namely, until law proceeds on the presumption that Corporation 
is one of the great and abiding elements of human society ; and 
that men have a natural right to form themselves into Corpo 
rations, for all such objects, and in all such manners, as they may 
choose ; except only where law deems it wise to interpose some 
special restrictions. And this freedom of Corporation must be 
held in its widest extent, from simple partnership upwards. 

It follows, as a matter of course, not only that all charters 
should be general instead of special, but rather that there should 
be no charters at all, except the legal contract between the par 
ties, perhaps duly recorded. It follows also, that the few re 
strictions which law may prescribe, to the right of Corporations, 
should be as general as the nature of the case may admit. 

The right of political Corporation, is fully equal to, and fully 
as extensive, in the abstract, as the right of contract ; but in the 
concrete and in practice, the right can only be acknowledged in 
proportion as human society becomes convinced, that the allow 
ance of the right will not injure it. The question is not merely 
whether some Corporations may not attain too much influence in 
the government ; but the question is, whether some other Corpo 
rations may not also be raised, more than sufficient to counteract 
the dangerous ones; and whether freedom of Corporation, like 
all other freedom of contract, and freedom of internal commerce, 
and we may even say, like all other legitimate freedom, promotes 
the general good, far more than any opposite course could. 

Corporation being voluntary, is an expression of personal 
conviction, and thus is TESTIMONY. As such, it relieves the 
mind's passion for the expression and maintenance of earnest 
convictions. And thus, passions and opinions, which for want 
of sufficient expression, would drive Individuals, Precincts or 
Nations, into debates, quarrels and wars, will steam out, boil 
over, and then settle down into quiet permanent Corporations. 


Just as passions in the Individual settle down, but become all 
the more efficient, when they become principles ; so the passions 
in society settle down, when they become permanent organiza 

The human intellect and heart, therefore, unite in the power 
ful conviction, that the right of Corporation ought to be free. 
In fact, the very claim to se{f-government, is a mere misnomer, 
a delusion, a disguise for tyranny, until this God-given right is? 
acknowledged and admitted, in all its divine freedom and force. 


Political Corporations are really more natural than business- 
partnerships. For, when persons enter into any business to 
gether, it is obviously more natural, to suppose a division of 
labor, so that some engage themselves in one thing, and some in 
another ; also more natural to suppose that some are managers, 
and some not, than to make the contrary supposition. The 
partnership law, that all the partners are liable for all things, 
and have right to do all things, is a merely arbitrary enactment 
of "law/ 7 which, no doubt, was one among the many means, 
whereby the old Land-aristocrats used to take advantage of the 
industrial and commercial classes. 

No act or form should ever be construed as meaning more 
than it fairly expresses, unless when in each case, a special ac 
knowledgment has been made, that such act or form shall have 
such extended meaning. According to this, all usual or simple 
partnerships would be limited, and all general partnerships 
would have to be expressed and published as such. The duty 
involved by the act of endorsing promissory notes, might at first 
sight, appear to be an exception to the above rule. But it is not ; 
because, endorsement means, from the first, that the last holder 
received the paper from the previous holder, and therefore has 
recourse to him, if it be not "good." What "the law" arbitra 
rily does, is, to limit this recourse. ' Endorsements " ab extra," 
merely for the sake of guaranteeing, are done for that very 
purpose impliedly ; and we are speaking of meanings, all along 

Accordingly therefore, even birth and citizenship in any coun 
try, without a voluntary acceptance, and the means thereof, should 


not be construed to involve any more extension of duties or 
rights, than what are absolutely necessary to right government. 
In all other matters, freedom of choice should be allowed. Ac 
cordingly, the free right of Corporation is a legitimate conclu 
sion. We are speaking of natural right ; and grant, that there 
are special exceptions; but for these exceptions, all the onus (or 
burden) of proof, lies upon those who maintain them. 


Probably the strongest isolated argument for political govern 
ment by Corporations, is, that it aifords by far the best method, 
to allow of governments being freely chosen and selected by 
their citizens individually. Unless there is acceptance of gov 
ernment by each Individual, spontaneously ; in other words, 
unless some important elements of unanimity, enter into the 
acceptance, and into the organization itself, there must be con 
siderable self-delusion or sophism, involved in the term SELF- 

Both Spencer and Ruskin, feeling the injustice of the present 
organizations of society, in this matter, have suggested that there 
must be some methods adopted for Individuals to ignore or avoid 
the state. And the method of government by Corporations, seems 
to be the simplest and easiest, whereby to meet this difficulty. 
Instead of liberty to ignore the state, we propose, liberty to change 
membership of one's official Corporation. 


Freedom of conscience demands the freedom of Corporation. 
There cannot be permanent peace in the world, and we had 
almost said there ought not to be; until the claim of human 
beings to tyrannize over each other, has become utterly refuted; 
and the right established, of men to form themselves freely, ac 
cording to their own consciences and judgments, into their own 
political, civil, and municipal organizations. And this can only 
come to pass, when the right of Corporations is generally ad 
mitted, and its practicability and expediency, generally known 
and acted upon by governments. 

The modern conscience in regard to war, demands the freedom 
of Corporation. The practice and duty of an ordinary govern- 


merit in time of war, is one of peculiar trial, in regard to the 
treatment of persons who refuse to co-operate in the war. Con 
scientious objections are easy to urge, in order to escape Indi 
vidual-duty. Those persons whose declamations had produced 
the war, those who want to profit by it, and even those who 
would fight or work on the other side, if they had a convenient 
opportunity, all, find it easy to urge conscientious scruples. 
But Peace-Corporations, duly established, present a fair and just 
means of avoiding the difficulty ; and if the country were in 
vaded, would be respected even by the enemy, under the press 
ure of the sanctions of Christianity, and of International Law. 
And the knowledge that the enemy would respect the Peace- 
Corporatio^s as neutrals, takes away the strongest inducement 
of the home-government for impressing their Individual-mem 
bers into "the service," or of devastating their territory. 

Multitudes of our best citizens believe, that government can 
not succeed without supporting and teaching religion, and are 
endeavoring to engraft religion into "the Law"; but unless 
they wish to force their own religions on other people, there 
only remains, besides separation into Precincts, the resource, of 
government by voluntary Corporations. 

It is only by our system, either of Precincts or of Corpora 
tions, that Individuals or societies can easily and legitimately be 
released, from suffering taxation for works which they utterly 
reprobate ; only thus can the peace-men escape war-taxes ; or 
the members of one religious education, escape the expenses of 
others ; or those who support their own sick or poor, from the 
expense of supporting the others, &c. 

But release from the taxation on foreign imports, could not 
easily be allowed to Corporations of persons scattered as to 
locality, except for the articles imported for their corporate use, 
or at any rate, for such as the Corporation itself should take out 
of the Custom's Bonded Warehouse, or out of their bonded cars 
or vessels, and should divide to its own members for their use; 
or such as they divided to others in charity. And perfect relief 
from .the foreign part of the tax, could only be accomplished by 
the Precinct itself, whose complete knowledge of all the doings 
of its members, and whose established reputation, would or 
might make its release from foreign tax, both safe and judicious. 


But this is a very transcendental application, neither probable, 
practicable, nor judicious, for a long time yet to come: although, 
the United States government has tried the plan of rail-road- 
cars under custom house locks ; but neither human nature, nor 
political nature, seems to us, good enough yet, for such methods 
to be allowed in common use. 




1. In General 

When considering the Precinct, we found that much of what 
it involved and demanded, could be explained and obtained by 
means of Corporation. So now, having come to the latter, we 
find also that much of what it involves and demands, can be 
explained and obtained by means of the former. The special 
arguments for the Precinct were, in nature, of two kinds. One 
kind, related to locality, and depended on that ; the other kind, 
related to the principles of things, abstract entirely from locality. 
These latter kind of arguments are they, which are equally as 
applicable to Corporation as to Precinct. 

2. Recapitulation from the Precinct. 

Let us now recapitulate from the Precinct, in their order, the 
chief arguments thus applicable to both elements. Demanded 
by the history of our own country, to ameliorate the ever in 
creasing evils of largeness of population : Allow all necessary 
adaptations : Derive light and regulation from international 
law : Admit of Amalgams with other Corporations : Resemble 
the system of the United States, inasmuch as the Army, the 
Navy, the Arsenals, the Navy Yards, the Revenue offices, the 
Post offices, are virtually national Corporations : Encourage 
Arbitration, both inward and outward of the Corporation : Re 
quire temporary Restrictions during the transitional period of 
their introduction : Separate the special politics and parties, from 


the national ones: TKey are elements of the Tribe-principle, 
and are needed by the theory of the Essential Elements : The 
natural right of Individuals to form them, is such, that the 
burden of proof lies upon the persons who would deny it : They 
make Social Circles practicable : Produce some of the effects 
of differences of geographical location : Produce in the world, 
whatever there is, of progress, in industry, in public works, in 
chivalry, in religion, in humanity and in cosmopolitan associa 
tion : The variety in God's creation ; parts crossing and inter 
twining within parts : The progress from homogeneity to hetero 
geneity : The development of new and special. organs for every 
function : New concentrations of, and diffusions of, power : So 
ciological .experiments : Ready changes of membership, from one 
to another : The objects and uses of Law : The release from legal 
force, by cultivating the powers of SELF-government in the In 
dividual : The Preparation in the Family : Moral homogeneity 
in associations : The spontaneous social punishments : The mul 
titude and minuteness of governmental affairs : Government by 
the parties directly interested : Uses of competition : Political 
objects and uses : Making personal acquaintanceship and direct 
voting, possible : Preventing corruption : Preventing specialties 
of law by the superior governments: Promote human happi 
ness: Tend to release people from the local sufferings whose 
causes they have protested against : Cultivate freedom of thought : 
Secure Individual liberty : Aljow a degree of ignoring of the 
state : Harmonize with human nature, like seeking like ; and 
thus resemble the law of Heaven : Are demanded by, and in 
turn promote, Morality and Religion : Make personal supervi 
sion and visitations, practicable and complete : Foster religious 
education according to the rights of conscience : Make Ruskin's 
and others 7 ideals practicable : Take the sting out of persecu 
tion : Introduce the advantages of the Tribe and its relations : 
Promote " stirpi-culture" and the introduction of improved 
breeds of human beings : Solve the political and legal difficul 
ties about divorce : Are the complements of each other : Cor 
porations mitigate the absoluteness of Precinct separation or 
segregation, and its consequent narrow-mindedness : They have 
no opening for the idea of secession ; Yet mitigate the abso 
lutism of national power : Make reactions more visible, but less 


severe : Open the way for cosmopolitan Unions : Have precedent 
in the Tribe of Levi ; And in the various local charters from 
superior powers : And supply the special needs of large cities. 
3. Power to Resist the oppressive and centralizing tendencies of 
Modern Society. 

There is a tendency in all Local governments, to suppress in 
dividuality, and to oppress the Individual. Mill describes this 
tendency as follows : (In Pol. Econ. V. xi. 3, he says) : "A 
general objection to government-agency is, that every increase 
of the functions devolving on the government, is an increase of 
its power, both in the form of authority, and still more, in the 
indirect form of influence. * * * Experience proves that the 
depositaries of power, who are mere delegates of the people, that 
is, of a majority, are quite as ready (when they think they can 
count on popular support), as any organs of oligarchy, to assume 
arbitrary power, and encroach unduly on the liberty of private 
life. The public collectively is abundantly ready to impose, not 
only its generally narrow views of its interests, but its abstract 
opinions, and even its tastes, as laws binding upon Individuals. 
And the present civilization tends so strongly to make the power 
of persons acting in masses, the only substantial power in society; 
that there never was more necessity for surrounding Individual- 
independence of thought, speech and conduct, with the most 
powerful defences; in order to maintain that originality of mind, 
and individuality of character, which are the only sources of any 
real progress, and of most of the qualities which make the human 
race much superior to any herd of animals. * * * Where public 
opinion is sovereign, an Individual who is oppressed by the sov 
ereign, does not, as in most other states of things, find a lival 
power, to which he can appeal for relief; or at all events, for 
sympathy." Hence we say, comes the necessity to allow those 
persons who sympathize, to segregate themselves freely. 

To the position of Mill, expressed above, and more formally 
asserted, "On Liberty": namely: "The tendency of all the 
changes taking place in the world, is to strengthen society, and 
to diminish the power of the Individual," Mulforcl, p. 273, 
replies : " It is presented with no historical evidence." (Mul- 
ford has a favorite way of dismissing obstinate objections, by 
charging them with being u abstractions" : pages v. bis, and vi., 


and 2, 11, bis, 19, 24, etc.; and yet his is the most abstract work 
on Social Science, perhaps, since Comte's). Mulford asserts 
'* the age of the higher national development of England, was the 
age also of Shakespeare, of Raleigh, of Bacon, of Milton"; just 
as if England's great period of Nationality, namely, the reign of 
Henry VIII., had not passed away a half a century or more, 
before these worthies appeared. But after all, it is of little con 
sequence, whether centralization and high nationality, does or 
does not produce a FEW greatest men. Mill's argument refers, 
not to effects on isolated Individuals, but to effects on the gen 
erality. The two cases are entirely different; and it may be 
true to some extent, in state, as it is in church, that the periods 
of highest churchism, are those which develop the very best 
persons individually; but yet in such few numbers, that the 
other condition of things is happiest for the generality, in the 
common course. Judaism produced the prophets, and finally, 
during its most perverted formalism, developed the Messiah, 
(humanly speaking). And some of the saints of the Roman 
Catholic Church, of the middle and later ages, are perhaps not 
surpassed by any since the closing of the canon. But thence 
forth, of what value in comparison, is an occasional Horace or 
Virgil, a Shakespeare or Dante, to the general happiness, or the 
general freedom, of a whole people ? Mr. Mulford says, " The 
country may be called the more free, which has roads open 
through it; but it is not the more free, when one person is 
always required to take a road through the valley, and one, 
always to ride on the hills." But we reply, that the same per 
son, when he has a carriage or is on foot, ought to pass a dif 
ferent road, from what he should when he has a dung wagon, 
still (it seems to us), the freedom is impaired, if dung wagons are 
allowed always to travel along the roads where other vehicles, 
and foot passengers, are going. But the freedom of these cen- 
tralizers, is, one road for all, namely, the NATIONAL Passenger 
Railroad, with ONLY ONE TRACK. 


1. Analogies in Biology. 

Physiology seems to show, that there are floating through all 
living creatures, both vegetable and animal, certain germs of life, 


which have the power of reproducing particles like themselves. 
And, by the freedom of these particles to unite with others, of a 
like or homogeneous kind, all growth and reproduction are ac 
complished. All depends upon the perfect freedom of the par 
ticles, as they float along in the blood, to unite together easily, 
according to their own attractions. Just so, every Individual- 
human being may be regarded, according to our type-theory, as 
a particle flowing along with the general current; but there can 
be no growth, and no progress, unless there is freedom for these 
particles to unite together, drop out of the current, and form 
new organisms. And this means freedom of Corporation. 

Corporations are the only political bodies of society, which 
have the power of generation by " gamogenesis," instead of by 
" agamogenesis." (For the physical doctrines and illustrations, 
see Spencer's Biology, 2 ; 6 : 4, 5, 6, &c.) This method is in 
definitely less at variance with growth, than the other method. 
It is also the method whereby all the higher plants and animals 
generate. To illustrate this : when a local division tal^es place, 
whether of Precinct or of Nation, the sum of the two parts, in 
each cas3, is only equal to what the whole was, previous to the 
division. But it is not so in Corporations. A subdivision will 
make both more efficient, because it introduces division of labor, 
and more specialty of organ for function. And these are im 
provements without any counteractive evils, scientifically speak 
ing. Furthermore, the division of Corporations, makes both 
parts more desirable to the members of other Corporations, some 
to one part of the division, and some to the other ; and this 
makes both parts draw members from other Corporations. But 
this is only competition, and therefore only a temporary and 
transitional good. The former mentioned, is the eternal good. 
And Individuals can be members of more than one Corporation ; 
just as children have more than one parent, and parents more 
than one child ; reciprooally. 

2. Prevention of War. 

One great an 1 peculiar advantage possessed by Corporations, 
is, that whereas, reyolutions and divisions in Local governments 
are usually accomplished only through war and blood, revo 
lutions and divisions in Corporations, are accomplished quite 
peaceably, and even charitably. The chief reason for this dif- 


ference, seems to be, that the human propensity to tyrannize, 
manifests its true nature so much more baldly and nakedly, in 
Corporations, than in Localities, that it is at once suppressed as a 
preposterous "vice of blood," instead of being nurtured and wor 
shiped as a divine patriotism, or as an Egyptian Cat, or as some 
other fetish: or as Carlyle might say, " Jewish old clothes." 

The Philadelphia "Ledger," Feb'y 8, 1871, in an article on 
"Friends' Principles," says, "We accord all honor to the 'sin 
gular' men who devote 'themselves to presenting, in plain terms, 
plain truths against ingenious sophistry. They are ' advanced 
pickets/ ' skirmishers' in the struggle for peace : and the main 
body of the great and peaceful army of thinking men, is fast 
closing up. So far as the claims of men as men, whether Galled 
citizens or subjects, are recognized, just so far the hope of the 
cessation of war is encouraged." We have already presented a 
similar thought, under the head of Right of Corporation. 
3. Inconceivable for Secession. 

Another great and peculiar advantage belonging to Corpora 
tion, compared with Precinct, is, that, Corporation not being co 
extensive with Locality, the secession of Localities is not only 
impracticable or impossible, as shown under PRECINCT; but also, 
is really and utterly inconceivable; under a system of Corpora 
tions, or as an effect or consequent therefrom ; and this Ele 
ment, therefore, is one of the most efficient means of insuring 
against said secession. 

4. Self -Counter actions. Inherent in all Voluntary Combina 

Every class, when left to itself, has its own counteractions 
within itself; knows what evidences of fact and of veracity to 
require, and what oscillations to provide for; knows its own 
temptations, its own protections, and its own moral supports. 
It is only when the cry is raised of class against class, that all 
the natural self-regulating powers, are overwhelmed and swept 
away, by the rush of angry class-animosities. And yet it is 
equally certain, from the Zo-ological nature of human society, 
also according to our theory of types, that the interests of each 
of these classes would evolve suitable forms, each for themselves, 
under a proper general government, if they were only allowed 
freely to do so. 


5. Necessary Harmony of all the Parts of Society. 

What Schleiermacher said, and is quoted by Neander, that all 
the denominations of Christians are necessary, to exhibit the 
perfect development of Christ and the church, may be applied 
equally well to the different Corporations, which, under the free 
dom of Corporation, would arise among the politicians, and in 
the state. And all are necessary to exhibit the full and com 
plete development of humanity, and society, and of humanity IN 
society. Freedom of civil and political Corporations, is equally 
as right, as necessary, and as practicable, as, of church Corpora 

The church analogy exhibits all the various classes of society 
as intermingling, sometimes in the same Corporation ; and gen 
erally in the same one locality, even when the different churches 
themselves organize according to classes or Social Circles. In 
this analogy, so long as it shall hold good, we have proof of the 
success of Corporations during an intermingling era. Hence, 
if our argument for the gradual passing away of the intermin 
gling era, as presented under Precinct, in II. X. 1, should be 
entirely rejected, then our Corporations come in with addi 
tional strength of argument, as capable of most of the political 
advantages of Precincts, yet without interfering with the friendly 

6. Culture of the Individual. 

Mr. Mill points out certain needs of human nature, increasing 
amid the tendencies of modern civilization, which, we think 
no other means of satisfying can be discovered, so efficient, as 
recognizing the freedom of Corporation. 

Mr. Mill, (Pol. Econ. p. 573), says : " Experience proves the 
extreme difficulty, of permanently keeping up a sufficiently high 
standard of those qualities, (the diffusion of intelligence, activity 
and public spirit, among the governed), a difficulty which in 
creases, as the advance of civilization and security, removes, one 
after another, of the hardships, embarrassments and dangers, 
against which individuals had formerly no resource but in their 
own strength, skill and courage. It is therefore of supreme 
importance, that all classes of the community, down to the 
lowest, should have much to do for themselves ; that as great a 
demand should be made upon their intelligence and virtue, as it 


is in any respect equal to ; that the government should not only 
leave, as far as possible, to their own faculties, the conduct of 
whatever concerns themselves alone, but should suffer them, or 
rather encourage them, to manage as many as possible of their 
joint concerns, by voluntary co-operation ; since this discussion 
and management of collective interests, is the great school of 
that public spirit, and the great source of that intelligence of 
public affairs, which are always regarded as the distinctive char 
acter, of the public of free countries." 

Here it seems plain to us, that there are certain needs in 
human nature, which are increasing so much in modern civiliza 
tion, that no other means to supply them can be discovered, so 
efficient as, on the one hand, the Precinct-system that we have 
proposed, and on the other hand, the system of free Corporations 
that we are now advocating, and chiefly the latter, because it is 
susceptible of such indefinite extension. Thus we see, that civ 
ilization is producing new functions ; but has already indicated, 
and begun to put forth, the organs that are necessary to perform 

7. The "De-facto" argument. 

In other parts of this work, we endeavor to show, that what 
ever is a fixed fact in society, ought to be recognized as such, in 
the laws, and by the government; and that whatever govern 
ment acts contrary to this principle, only stultifies itself, as an 
organism, and produces misery to Individuals. Hence, all the 
instances that we offer, of the existence of virtual Corporations, 
good, bad, and indifferent, combine under this principle of 
government, to prove the right and necessity of their freedom 
and legal recognition. 

All the foreigners of any one Nation are, virtually, Corpora 
tions of their own Nation, but dwelling in another. And just as 
Asiatic Russia is a conglomerate of many Precincts, of essentially 
different nationalities, so the United States is a conglomerate 
of many virtual Corporations, of essentially different nationali 
ties. These Corporations, to be sure, are not recognized in law, 
otherwise than by publishing legal documents in their different 
languages ; still the distinctions exist, and are even stronger be 
tween clans speaking the same English language, than between 
those speaking different ones. And it must be admitted, with 


shame to ourselves, that those settlements of foreigners which 
have been most compact and self-secluded, have preserved their 
morality best; whatever might be said about their lack of 

Civil governments are actually conducted and swayed, by 
secret leagues and cliques, which are Corporations in fact ; and 
\Ahich transmit their authority from age to age, except as dis 
placed, from time to time, by the same kinds of cliques of other 
parties. There are leagues of persons engaged in "humbug 
ging" the people in their recreations, or poisoning them, in their 
amusements, with rum or vice. There is also a tyrannical sort 
of gentlemen, who even incorporate themselves into rings and 
clubs, as the actual but secret rulers of the community. Much 
worse than these also, are the permanent cliques of professional 
criminals, which are known to embrace various distinct classes: 
as for instance, cliques of counterfeiters; in which, will be man 
ufacturers, wholesale purchasers, retail purchasers, transitory 
venders : and there are cliques of burglary ; professional oper 
ators of many grades, transient operators, receivers of stolen 
goods, of all grades, from large financial securities, down to old 
iron. All these organizations are of the nature of Corporations. 
Since then, criminals incorporate themselves to break the laws, 
and since all the rogues and outlaws, gamblers, and parasites in 
society, everywhere, make leagues, either formal or actual, foV 
mutual offence and defence, and for bribing legislators, judges 
and police executive officers; why should not plain citizens in 
corporate themselves in their own way, to protect themselves, 
and to choose government and rulers and laws for themselves, 
and defend themselves from these barbarians, who make it their 
business to war upon society, rob industry, and strike down 
peace and order ? and all this, oftentimes, by the connivance of 
the same wretched gentlemen, who are the loudest in crying 
"stop thief"; and who befool the people with the longest and 
tangledest laws, they can quibble up together. 

Thus, Corporations are getting to have the actual power ; and 
it would be better to make them legal, else the bad have the ad 
vantage of them, rather than the good ; and the worse the asso 
ciations are, the more defiant their power becomes. Because, so 
long as the freedom and right of Corporations, are crippled by 


law ; so long the fearful fact will continue, that the lower down 
in the moral scale, and the more thoroughly contrary to law, 
each such association is, the more thoroughly compact and effi 
cient its o< rporate character will be. In other words, so long as 
law limits the natural and moral right of Corporation, the worse 
a Corporation is, the more proportional power it will have. 
8. Classes most Needing Separate Political Corporations. 

Persons who are diverse in their sentiments on important or 
agitating subjects, cannot understand each other; nor can the 
peculiar results of each party's system, be exhibited, whilst the 
persons are continually, either checking each other, or annoying 
each other. Nor can a government for daily life, adopt forms 
of police and courts and trials and evidence and watching, that 
can apply, either rightly or effectively, to all these different 
kinds of people. What to some is galling tyranny, to others is 
the blessing of self-control ; to others, the blessing of civiliza 
tion ; and to others, the blessing of religion : the oaths that 
some regard, others despise ; and the honor that holds some true 
to humanity, is to others, a nice "chance" for dishonesty, selfish 
ness, or deceit. 

Where a government is elected by the people, any classes of 
persons who are too distant, in customs, politics, or religion, to 
receive, read, and enjoy, a proper government-press, giving a 
fair representation to all sides, and to all views, are too dis 
tant morally, to reside in the same Precinct, or to assemble 
peacefully and orderly at the same polls. The only other alter 
native would be, the introduction of this system of Corpora 
tions, and its development to its widest capabilities, and highest 
functions ; so that no persons could vote for any councils, or on 
any matters, affecting the other party, or the other religion; 
except those who could be trusted by their political or spiritual 
advisers, to read and hear all sides fairly expressed : and on the 
other hand, those persons who did thus read in common and 
freely, should not have the control over those who were con 
scientiously opposed to or afraid of, thus reading ; so far at least, 
as ingenuity and fairness can contrive plans of avoiding such 
objectionable control, without vitiating the direct operations of 

The following are some of the portions of society, who are, 


or think they are, in most immediate need of the privilege 
of organizing themselves into plenary political Corporations, 
especially in the cities and more dense settlements : Calvinists, 
Roman Catholics, Methodists, Quakers and other Interiorists, 
Peace-parties, Spiritualists, Unitarians, Rational religionists. In 
fidels, Chinese, and perhaps Africans generally. Also, may be 
added Women in general, if they are to exercise political func 
tions at all ; but, do not put respectable women into Precincts 
for females alone. Others needing the separation, are, Disgraced 
young people born without wedlock ; penitent women ; reformed 
criminals, and convicts released from punishment; and in gen 
eral, all who are particularly good, particularly bad, particularly 
bigoted, particularly liberal, or otherwise particularly singular. 

9. Comparison with Individuals, as -Officials. 
We return now to a different train of thought, namely, to Cor 
porations as organs of society, as the exercisers of derived, or 
bestowed, political functions. Corporations possess many advan 
tages peculiar to themselves, over Individuals, as organs of so 
ciety. Even in the simplest form of small partnerships, many 
of these advantages become very apparent. First then ; Cor 
porations are the new organs for the new functions of modern 
society. Thus the old age of society becomes, like its infancy, 
the restoration of the fullness in unity, of the Tribe. Second ; 
Their officers are free from the over-strong ties of personal in 
terest, which naturally arise against large payments, or onerous 
duties, especially if unexpected. Third ; We have the argu 
ment, that history gives us instances, wherein strictly govern 
mental functions have been entrusted to Corporations. Fourth ; 
As all such organizations originate in a free and voluntary action 
of their corporators, they select themselves really, from a judg 
ment of their own fitness. Fifth ; And then again, the officers 
of such organizations are selected by the corporators, with the 
judgment of persons well able to know about them. Sixth ; 
In this judgment, the corporators necessarily back up and 
guarantee their judgment, not only by their reputation, but also 
by the amount of their capitals, or, respective interests invested ; 
and thus make their responsibility perpetual. This is a respon 
sibility seldom imposed upon, and seldom possible in the case 
of, Individual-officials, and would be reasonably exacted from 


Corporations, but not from Individuals. A sufficient applica 
tion of this rule, would put political Corporations upon their 
very best efforts to regulate themselves harmoniously, which is 
far more than can be said of Individual-politicians. Seventh ; 
They are not so liable to be interrupted by death. Eighth; They 
tend to prevent villany; because no collusions for evil, between 
different persons, can be so unrestricted, nor so safe from detec 
tion, as the secret thought in one man's soul. Although such is 
their natural tendency, and what might be secured in them, by 
proper sociological skill ; yet, in fact, they often do worse things 
than an Individual would do. This is partly because their 
officers are allowed to shield themselves under the plea of official 
duty. But this very feature might be so made use of, that many 
of the repulsive works of society might be accomplished by those 
means, much better, than by the direct action of civil or political 




To discuss the practicability of Corporations perfectly, .the 
subject would divide itself into two -parts ; one, the method of 
their action, and the means whereby they manifest their practi 
cability ; the other, a series of abstract arguments and analogies, 
to show this practicability. As to the methods and means of 
action ; they will be treated among the objects in view, and will 
be again treated in the Third Main Division and its sub-divisions. 
Nothing need be said of them just now, except this call of atten 
tion. As to the abstract arguments ; many of them are involved 
in what has already been said ; namely, in the facts of history ; 
in the opinions of the great writers on Social Science ; in the 
doctrines of the right and the expediency ; in the analogies of 
Biology; in the instinctive organizations of Mankind, even the 
illegitimate ones ; and in the classes of men ready and waiting. 


And above all other arguments or reasons, we have faith that 
what is RIGHT, is certainly PRACTICABLE, if we are only willing 
for it. We now turn to and touch upon, the abstract argu 
ments, and the analogies, showing practicability. 


1. Ill Success of Local Governments in Other Businesses. 

Scarcely anything is more certainly agreed upon in Social Sci 
ence, than the proposition, that whatever business, commercial, 
literary or social, that men do or can do, with any tolerable suc 
cess voluntarily ; they can and will do much better thus volun 
tarily, than government itself can do, or than they themselves 
would do, by any legal or any other coercion whatever. Now, 
all that our theory of Corporation proposes to do, is, to accept 
this well established principle, and to apply it to the business of 
government itself. We say, true, men can conduct any busi 
ness voluntarily, far better than government can, and therefore 
they can thus carry on the business or function of government 
itself, by spontaneous organizations within the Nation, and within 
the Precinct. Thus Mr. Mill, (Political Economy, Book 5, ch. 
xi. 5) says, " In all the more advanced communities, the great 
majority of things are done worse by the intervention of gov 
ernment, than the Individuals most interested in the matter, 
would do them, or cause them to be done, if left to themselves. 
The grounds of this truth are expressed with tolerable exactness 
in the popular dictum, that people understand their own busi 
ness and their own interests, better than the government does, 
or can be expected to do. This maxim holds true throughout 
the greatest part of the business of life; and Vherever it is true, 
we ought to condemn every kind of government intervention, 
that conflicts with it. The inferiority of government agency, 
for example, in any one of the common operations of industry, 
or commerce, is proved by the fact, that it is hardly ever able to 
maintain itself, in equal competition with Individual-agency; 
where the Individuals possess the requisite degree of industrial 
enterprise, and can command the necessary assemblage of means. 
All the facilities which a government enjoys, of access to in 
formation, all the means it possesses of remunerating and there 
fore of commanding, the best available talent in the market, 


are not an equivalent for the one great disadvantage of an in 
ferior interest in the result." 

" It must be remembered, besides, that even if a government 
were superior in intelligence and knowledge, to any single Indi 
vidual in the Nation, it must be inferior to all the Individuals 
of the Nation, taken together. It can neither possess in itself, 
nor enlist in its service, more than a portion of the acquirements 
and capacities which the country contains, applicable to any 
given purpose. There must be many persons equally qualified 
for the work, with those whom the government employs, even 
if it selects its instruments with no reference to any considera 
tion but their fitness. Now these are the very persons, into 
whose hands, in the cases of most common occurrence, a system 
of Individual-agency naturally tends to throw the work, because 
they are capable of doing it better, or on cheaper terms, than any 
other persons. So far as this is the case, it is evident, that gov 
ernment, by excluding or even by superseding Individual-agency, 
either substitutes a less qualified instrumentality, for one better 
qualified ; or at any rate, substitutes its own mode of accom 
plishing the work, for all the variety of modes which would be 
tried by a number of equally qualified persons, aiming at the 
same end ; a competition by many degrees more propitious to 
the progress of improvement, than any uniformity of system." 
2. Intermingling ', Not Confusion. 

The difficulties and confusions that might, at first sight, be 
supposed to be insuperable on account of the intermingling in 
one Locality, of persons belonging to different municipal and 
political Corporations, could readily be counteracted; in some 
things, by artificial regulations, and in other things, by the natu 
ral differences that would arise in the course of time. Nothing 
that man makes, can be perfect at the start. The functions of 
time must. not be forgotten. The same ingenuity, and homo 
geneity of humanity, that devise Inter-National and Inter- 
Precinct law, would also devise Inter-Corporation Law. 

Perhaps even the residents of adjoining Precincts, should 
wear different dresses. At any rate, such a custom should be 
required of all Individuals who were members of different 
governmental Corporations for general civil purposes, whilst 
residing in the same districts. Varieties of dress, as here pro- 


posed, together with such varieties of' manners, habits, &c., as 
would, in time, probably arise and be visible, both as cause and as 
effect of connection with such Corporations, would make differ 
ences which would be almost as plain to the casual observer, as 
differences of sex or race ; or at least, as are easily perceived be 
tween the countryman and the citizen, or between the out-door 
and in-door workers, &c. And the degree in which the differ 
ences could be made plain, would facilitate the duties of the 
civil government towards each. Instances of the arising of such 
differences, may be remembered, as characteristic of the Puri 
tans, the early Methodists, and of the Quakers even at the 
present day. Spencer has also shown how naturally the polit 
ical differences of men, express themselves in their differences of 
clothing, gait, and other apparently trivial signs. 

3. Buskin's Specimen of Methods. 

Mr. Ruskin has a beautiful and practicable picture, of a 
method of trade Corporations, for preventing cheating in the 
manufacture or sale of "sham" goods. He says (pp. 87-8); 
" The chief difficulty in the matter would be, to fix your 
standard. This would have to be done by the guild of every 
trade, in its own manner, and within certain easily recognizable 
limits. * * * Advisable improvements of varieties in manufac 
ture, would have to be examined and accepted by the trade 
guild ; when so accepted they would be announced in public 
reports ; and all puffery and self-proclamation, on the part of 
tradesmen, absolutely forbidden, as much as making any other 
kind of noise or disturbance." [We hope the " disturbances" to 
be stopped, include advertisements in Directories and other such 
inappropriate places.] " But observe, this law is only to have 
force over tradesmen whom I suppose to have joined VOLUNTA 
RILY, in carrying out a better system of commerce. Outside of 
their guild, they would have to leave the rogue to puff and 
cheat as he chose, and the public to be gulled as they chose. All 
that is necessary is, that the said public should clearly know the 
shops in which they could get warranted articles ; and as clearly, 
those in which they bought at their own risk." But now, this 
writer must say, that as yet, unless each such guild had power 
by law, to punish those of its own members who transgressed 
and cheated, whilst they were sailing under the flag of the guild; 


then the use of the guild would soon be destroyed by the rush of 
hypocrites into it ; and the better its reputation was, before the 
rogues got into it, the more they could profit by it, until discov 
ered and exposed. And to give the guilds such power, is just 
what we are asking to be given to one class of Corporations. 
Mr. Ruskin advocates the punishment to be " confiscation of 
goods," and this admits the principle we are arguing for ; but 
not at all to the extent that we suppose to be necessary. 


1. Analogy with Philadelphia. 

If it be thought that any one of our (or indeed, any other) 
systems of Corporations, would be too complicated for practical 
purposes, we would answer ; they need not be any more compli 
cated in structure, than our own present government, or than the 
British. Take for instance, our own city Philadelphia, in the 
year 1872. It is, somehow, made to consist of an almost un- 
classifiable multiplicity of Voting Precincts, City Wards, Dis 
tricts for State Legislature, and for State Senate, for Fires, and 
for Police, and for Congress of the United States. We vote for 
our State Governor every three years, and for President every 
four years. And, in general, the divisions cross each other in a 
variety of ways, so complicated as to baffle the book learning of 
foreigners, while in practice they are perfectly familiar to our- 
w selves. We have a series of items, not often multiples of each 
other in figures, and still less frequently so, in localities ; neither 
are they related to each other as genera and species, nor even as 

Here then, we have a city divided into 28 Wards, with 28 
Select, and 58 Common Council-men, 7 Fire Districts, 18 Dis 
tricts for State Assembly, 4 Districts for State Senate, 5 for 
United States Representatives, one of which stretches into 
another county ! The city municipal administration is divided 
into " Departments," " Committees," and " Trusts" ; of; Police; 
Treasury ; Control ; Tax ; Law ; Market ; Survey ; Registry ; 
Highway ; Water ; Gas ; School ; Health ; Girard ; Poor ; 
Prison ; Refuge ; and Port. The Nation has on the same 
ground, a Custom House, (The business in the Custom House 
alone, is so complicated, and requires to be performed at so 


many successive " Desks/' that a considerable number of per 
sons called custom-house brokers, find ample employment in 
preparing the papers for sea captains and merchants, and in 
" putting them through" the rounds) : a Naval Department ; a 
Surveyor's-; an Appraiser's-; an Assistant Treasurer's-; an 
Internal Revenue- ; and a Post-, Office ; also a Mint ; a Navy 
Yard ; and an Arsenal. All national property and offices, are 
exempt from city and state interference, a set of Corporations 
in the Precinct, yet of Imperial authority. Besides all these 
regularly instituted organizations ; we have an indefinite num 
ber of spontaneous and voluntary Social Circles, Party Clubs 
and Conventions, Temperance, Mechanics' and Beneficial, So 
cieties, Trades-unions, Churches, Communities, Brotherhoods, 
Militia, and Fire Companies; "Boards" or "Exchanges," of 
Trade, of Brokers, of Coal, of Corn, of Real Estate, &c. All 
these interlap each other in every conceivable direction. 

And now, finally to settle disputes among all these, and the 
members of them, we have, partly, the reserved power in the 
agreements of several of the associations and boards ; also a 
series of legal courts as follows; The County, (exactly the 
same geographically as the city,) has, besides the "Row" of 
officers, a body of Judges, who incorporate themselves into 
three different forms of County courts, viz.: Common Pleas, 
Orphans', and Criminal. Then, there are a State District 
Court, a State Supreme Court, and a National Circuit Court, * 
with right of appeal in certain cases to the National Supreme 
Court at Washington. All this is complicated enough ; but we 
know by experience, " it is nothing when you get used to it." 
We also know how readily children learn the most complicated 
languages, when they begin during infancy. 

2. Analogy with the Roman Church. 

But the completest illustration, of a united and harmonious 
system of Corporations in great multiplicity, is found in the 
Roman Catholic Church. Here is a system that is not learned 
in infancy. Omitting those parts of it, which, while adhering 
to Rome, yet adhere not to the Latin " rite," we may divide 
its organizations purely ecclesiastical, abstract from the civil 
organs, into FOUR different or main Divisions, all operating one 
within another. We will mention thorn in an order, such, that 


each subsequently named one, operates WITHIN AXL the pre 
viously named ones, thus ; FIRST. The usual church-orders of 
Priests, Bishops, Archbishops, &c. These have territorial loca 
tions, one within another. SECOND. The Corporate Orders, 
operating within the territories of the above ; yet exempt from 
their jurisdiction, by express general authority from the supreme 
head of their church, but yet dependent upon said territorial 
officials for their spiritual offices or " faculties." THIRD. The 
special delegates of the supreme authority; as Vicars, Legates, 
and so on. FOURTH. Appellate authorities, namely, the Pope, 
and General Councils. All these operating on each other re 
spectively, in the order mentioned. And now, to this complica 
tion, let us add a brief summary of the varieties of authorities 
and operators, IN each of those four main divisions of their 

FIRST Main Division of Authorities. The varieties of the 
usual orders of Local Officials, or Ordinaries, with their re 
spective councils. First we have a regular gradation, Bishops, 
Archbishops, Primates. Next we have two sorts of irregular 
classes, namely, Metropolitans and Patriarchs. 

SECOND Main Division of Authorities. The CORPORATE 
Orders, operating within the territories of the above. These 
are in three divisions, namely, the Orders of Military Monks, 
the Religious Orders, and the " Congregation" Orders. 

First Division of the Corporate Bodies : The Orders of Mil 
itary Monks include the Knights of St. John, The Templars, 
The Teutonic Knights, Orders of Alcantara, &c. But those 
are not found in the United States. 

Second Division of the Corporate Bodies: The Religious 
Orders, are of four sub-divisions, namely : The Monks Proper ; 
the Friars or Mendicants ; the Canons regular ; and the Priests 
called regular Clerks. Of these four sub-divisions, the Monks 
Proper are of two kinds, of which the Eastern may be omitted 
here. The Western kind occasionally follow the Eastern rule, 
namely, of St. Basil ; but most always the rule of St. Benedict. 
This kind are sit6-divided by a great variety, as, Carthusians, 
Cistercians, Celestines, Trappists, <fec., &c. The second sub 
division, the Friars or Mendicants, are divided into Dominicans, 
Franciscans, Carmelites, Augustinians, &c. The third sub-divi- 



sion, the Canons regular, are priests administering among the 
people, but yet, associated under special rules and obligations 
of strictness of life, for the promotion of their own especial 
personal sanctity. They are of two kinds, differing as to the 
degree of their abstraction from the world, and as to their re 
semblance to monks in their private life. The fourth sub-divi 
sion, consists of Priests called regular Clerks. They differ from 
the regular Canons, in not following so strict a life, or at least 
in not taking any such strict vows as the others. Some of these 
are evidently adapted to secular operations, as for instance the 
Jesuits ; others are followers of a purer and more spiritual inte 
rior piety, than is often found in or out of the Roman Church, 
as for instance, the Theatines. 

The Third Division of the Corporate Orders, is " the Congre 
gations." These are made a separate order from the " religious 
orders," by some differences not well understood, but which 
appear partly only nominal. The " Congregations" exist for 
various purposes, Education, Asylum, and Missionary. And 
these divisions for purposes, are again to be sub-divided accord 
ing to the classes of persons to be influenced, as the poor, the 
paying people, the rulers of society, the heathens, the unbe 
lievers or heretics, and finally even the other orders of clergy 
and of their own religion. 

The THIRD Main Division of Authorities, are ; The special 
delegates of the supreme authority, as Vicars, Legates, &c., &c. 
Of these, some of the Vicars are regular, and located, but ex 
traordinary in their powers. Other Vicars and the Legates are 
irregular, and only appear on extraordinary occasions, represent 
ing the Pope, investigating facts, hearing causes, and pronouncing 
decisions, by direct and special authority from the Head. These 
act in and on, both the foregoing main Divisions. Moreover, the 
Legates and Xuncios act on and with the civil governments, 

FOURTH Main Division of Authorities. The supreme gov 
ernment of all this vast system of Corporations, consists of 
three elements, namely ; First, The Pope ; Second, Three orders 
of Cardinals, namely, Cardinal Bishops, Cardinal Priests, and 
Cardinal Deacons; Third, The General Council. The Cardi 
nals elect the Pope ; and the Pope selects the Cardinals. He 


also constitutes the General Council, and appoints its times and 
circumstances; but not all its Individual-members directly, 
although indirectly, as he appoints or confirms to the offices 
which constitute membership in the Council. 

All this, theoretically seems an inextricable tangle, to some 
people. And when we remember ^fchat many of the foregoing 
orders, are themselves highly organized bodies, with their " mother 
houses" or head-centers, at Rome, we have an additional com 
plication, apparently ; but the fact is, it is this very thoroughness 
of the organizations, which prevents complexity in practice. All 
these different orders, or at least many heterogeneously self-locat 
ing ones, exist and operate in the same localities, with one another, 
and with the "ordinary" clergy, without confusion. No royal 
family, no constitution, no dynasty, no Nation in a continuous 
local government, except the Jewish and Chinese, can compare, 
either for its own durability, or for the certainty of its opera 
tions, with this great world-wide governing Corporation. And 
the only place where real and great practical uncertainty arises, 
is, where organization is theoretically simplest, namely at the head, 
as to which is the superior, the Pope, or the General Council. 


The fact is that a system of Corporations for government, 
would in all probability, be less complicated IN PRACTICE, than 
our present civil system. But even if more complicated, it could 
easily be taught and explained in the public schools, and else 
where. Moreover, in the last resort we may say that, at any rate, 
legal proceedings require learned counsel and experienced attor 
neys, generally. It would be no real objection to the system of 
Corporation, if ordinary Individuals had to consult " good ad 
vice," in order to know even what Corporations they had better 
connect themselves with ; just as they would consult a physician, 
as to what medicine they should take. The main thing to be 
attained in law, as in Medicine, in Mathematics or in other sci 
ences, is, not simplicity, but certainty and uniformity in their 
results, known to those who study them, and who are able to 
understand them. We do not complain that we are compelled 
to resort to Lawyers and Doctors and Clergymen, for advice ; 
but we complain, that the expenses are great, the answers con 
flicting, and the results uncertain. 









Having in the preceding Main Division, treated of the argu 
ments for the propriety, right, and expediency, of Governmental 
Corporations; and before giving the scientific exhibition and 
recital of them,, which are reserved for the Third Main Division ; 
we proceed now to give, as a necessary preparation thereunto, a 
general survey of ALL KINDS of Corporations, according to their 
several Natures. 

One reason for laboring hard on this subject of Corporation, 
is, that the right of Corporation includes within it the right of 
Precinct; because freedom of Politico-governmental Corpora 
tion, actually becomes freedom of Precinct, to persons who de 
sire to reside in special Precincts; so that, if the reader has not 
been satisfied with the arguments for the Precinct, upon the 
grounds which have been made under that head, he might still 
be induced to lend assent to the right of Precinct, upon perhaps 
not so deep foundations, but yet broader and more comprehen 
sive ones. 

.AYe lay great stress on governmental or political Corporations, 
and feel the great dependence of human prosperity and progress, 
on the proper understanding and practical application of them. 
Such Corporations seem to give hopes of real and absolute 
progress, instead of hopes always to be disappointed, and hith 
erto reaching mostly after FORMS of government ; whereas, real 
progress is more and more perceived to be, not dependent on 


forms. Corporation is not any ONE FORM, but a spirit, an eter 
nal element, and an inherent power. 

Corporation is the Seventh Element in our scale of the Ana 
lytics, namely, Individual, Family, Social Circle, Precinct, 
Nation, and Mankind ; and then as another genus, Corporation. 
Hence, Corporations, as the SEVENTH fundamental or Analytical 
element of human society, are a kind of sabbath of rest, both 
to the fundamental Elements of Society, and also to the throes 
of society itself, laboring to bring forth its ideals of happiness, 
and to realize its divine origin, and its ultimate ideal. 

In a Biological classification, Corporations would correspond 
to brain and nerve in the Individual ; whereas the other Ele 
ments of our Analytics would correspond to the less recondite 
organs. Corporations fulfill functions towards general society, 
and towards the state, similar to what the personal mental and 
moral qualities or peculiarities of the Individual, which give 
rise to their respective Corporations, fulfill IN the Individual. 
Thus the delicate sensitiveness of Corporations, and the toler 
ance given to them by the state, are true indications of the in 
tellectual and moral character of society, and of the state at large ; 
whether for better or for worse. 

We have repeatedly hinted, in the Summary Introduction, 
that our discovery of the Six Great Units of Society, originated 
in and from three Distinct lines of thought. These three trains 
of thought, when brought together and compared, helped to per 
fect each other severally, and to corroborate the correctness of 
them all, as thus perfected. And their thus perfecting each 
other, and thus correcting one another's aberrations, led to the 
discovery of the Tribe-principle, and to the classifying of Cor 
poration as almost, but not quite, another such a Unit. 

The order of thought was about as here given. First was 
discovered the value of several of them as types, for argument 
and induction. Second, the value of several of them as heads 
for improved classification. And third, the value of several, as 
the Great Units of which Society consists. But it was not 
exactly the same several, whose value was thus discovered, in 
each case. Towards the completion of the discovery, these three 
severals looked about as in the annexed table, which represents 
them in parallel columns. 



The three trains of thought were about as follows. 

As Types. 
Social Circle 

As Classification. 
Social Circle 

As Units. 


Social Circle 

Elements of Society. 
Instinctive, ) 1 Social Circle 
i.e. Units j | Precinct 
| Nation 
^ Mankind 
Deliberative, }- <[ Corporation 

The three lines of thought finally became identified as fol 

Social Circle 

The differences and aberrations were corrected about as fol 
lows. The Classification only called for the elimination of 
State, which was not on either side of it ; or rather, its identifi 
cation with Precinct, which was already in two columns ; and 
then it contained the full seven. The Types allowed of Man 
kind being added from both the others, being as Mankind is the 
ideal anti-type, towards which all those below it, point ; and as 
it, in turn, is typical of other beings in other solar systems, and 
also typical' of God and the Universe. And then, the Types 
called for Nation as the highest earthly type of Mankind. Thus 
the Type-line amounted to the full seven. All that then re 
mained therefore, was to settle the Unit-Line. But as Corpora 
tion could not be taken as a Unit ; both for lack of history for 
it ; and for the reasons given in Bk. I. Pt. II. Chap. VI. 1 ; 
also for the reasons, that Corporation cannot, without remain 
der, be divided into all the Units above it, nor thus evenly be 
divided by all the Units below it; therefore Social Circle and 
Precinct .had to be taken, as the needed Units; and then Cor 
poration had to be disposed of as a separate Grand Classifica 
tion ; and therefore had to be placed last of all ; as is done in 


Bk. I. Pt. I. Chap. IX. 4 (6), and throughout our whole work. 
But to justify this, the three had to be co-ordinated in the 


The Tribe-Principle originating and established, as above and 
as elsewhere mentioned, involves, among other things, the per 
petual recolleetion of the principle, that Corporation, for pur 
poses of general or ungeneric classification, belongs up next to 
Social Circle and Precinct; but has to be placed LAST, only, 
because of its functions in the Unit-column : and because of being 
a Fundamental Element of society itself, it has to be placed 
apart from the six Units ; and of course it could not be placed 
before Individual. 

This explanation seems necessary, because, from Corporation 
being placed at the top, in an ascending series, some persons have 
wondered if we meant to place it above Nation : whereas, since 
we place it after Mankind, they ought rather to have wondered 
whether we meant to place it above Mankind ; and that wonder 
ought soon to satisfy itself without further explanation : And 
here we let the matter rest. 

It has been repeatedly said, that our theory of types has this 
extensive meaning, namely, that in the ascending scale of the 
Six Units, each one is a type of all those that are higher than it. 
This theory itself is partly an inference from the fact, that in 
the historical development of human society, as new units are 
formed, the old ones are still always retained ; that is to say, 
when Families have been formed, the Individuals still exist, 
and when tribes have been formed, the Families continue to 
exist; and so on upwards. Hence it follows, that when the 
tribe resolves itself, in modern society, into the three forms of 
Social Circle, Precinct and Corporation, all those Elements must 
always continue in living action. The facility with which these 
three elements of Tribe, change, one into the other, or substitute 
themselves one for the other, has been sufficiently remarked upon, 
in Bk. I. Part II. Chaps. VIII. and IX., and in Bk. II. Part 
II. Chap. XII. 1, and elsewhere. Hence then, we must 
always look for such an abiding activity of the Tribe-principle, 
and of the Corporation-principle, in civil governmsnt. 


Moreover, Corporation, as it comes after the six, in the order 
of the Analytics, is, in one sense, more abstract than either of 
them, and therefore logically more general. In this sense, they 
are all types of it, as well as in the other sense, it is type of them. 


The old saying, that government has no rights nor duties over 
Individuals, except to prevent them from injuring others, be 
comes, in our theory, changed to the proposition, that government 
has no rights nor duties over Precincts,, nor over governmental 
Corporations, whether local or general, except to prevent them 
from committing injuries, either on other .such Precincts or Cor 
porations, or on those Individuals who have a just claim and 
right to depart TO such others. 

Our object in the treatment of Corporations, is partly, to en 
deavor to point out, how, nearly all the civil relations can be 
performed better by them, than they are by the present consolid 
ated governments of the world : better, in fact, than they can be 
in any other method, unless perhaps by going forward and giving 
to the Precinct-governments the investiture of their localities; 
with that fulness of power which our Precinct-theory endeavors 
to point out : although it is also partly our object, to develop a 
complete theory of Corporations, that will apply to their con 
struction within the Precinct, so far as they are needed, and even 
so far as they arc possible, there. 

Moreover, the variety of choices between the different kinds of 
Corporations, that we point out, becomes important to be remem 
bered, because we thereby obtain different classes of developments 
from, and of hopes in, the Corporation-theory. And as the density 
of the world's population increases ; nothing is more certain than, 
that, both the increased density, and also the increased numbers, 
will require new developments, new evolutions, and new differen 
tiations, of all the various kinds of associations, political as well 
as others. And Corporations are the readiest methods, of thus 
differentiating and evolving ; because they do not necessarily re 
quire change of residence, nor change of Location for any purpose ; 
and because they arise with much more freedom and directness, 
from the voluntary powers of Individuals, Families, and Social 
Circles; and with less interference or intervention by "the law." 


While pointing out, however, the logical relations above 
mentioned, we all along incidentally, in the treatment of this 
subject, endeavor to establish the right, the utility, and the prac 
ticability of the General Theory. Furthermore, we endeavor 
incidentally to point out, for all these general doctrines, the 
arguments in respect to two other special doctrines, namely; one, 
that all virtual Corporations ought to be recognized by municipal 
law ; the other, that fractional uses of Corporations ought to be 
turned into wholes, and that fractional Corporations ought to be 
superseded by wholes. But yet by wholes, we do not mean one 
whole Corporation for all departments of government} or for 
all subject-matters thereof; but mean, systems of Corporations, 
such systems as will together make up a whole, and the scien 
tifically organized parts of which, may therefore be called wholes. 


Corporation, though not a natural Element of society, in the 
same sense that the others are, is yet none the less absolutely 
fundamental, in the higher development of society, and even 
absolutely necessary, until Mankind arrive at a state of per 
fection both of the Individual and of society : and even then, 
although less necessary, it would be quite as safe. It is there 
fore really none the less a natural Element than the others; 
although it is less obviously so. For, the mere fact that it may 
be dispensed with in a perfect state, is no argument against its 
being natural ; for the same may be equally true of the Pre 
cinct or the Nation or the Social Circle, and as some imagine, of 
the Family itself. For, to introduce biological illustrations, the 
chrysalis is only a transition from the egg to the fly ; but yet 
it is a natural state. So also the time of fruitfulness in the 
female, is merely transitional between puberty and a more ad 
vanced state ; but still it is natural. Neither can Corporation 
be deprived of the attribute natural, on the ground of its being 
voluntary ; for the will is natural, in every sense that the word 
natural can be applied to anything metaphysical. Furthermore, 
even if Corporations could be dispensed with, in a perfect state, 
yet in that state they are all the more susceptible of the highest 
developments, and of the highest and most varied uses to Man 


Mr. E. H. Hamilton has suggested the idea, of the church 
itself as THE great Unit of society. But this of course, can 
only be true of that Catholic ideal-unit, of that ideal society, 
which is not yet formed. Nevertheless, in a government con 
sisting of Corporations, the fundamental importance of the 
church, could not be overlooked. The church, that is to say, 
the SYSTEM of churches, presents us the grandest and most im 
portant system of Corporations to be found in modern times ; a 
system of which the Roman Church organization itself, grand 
as it is, is only a part and a type. The great entrance of Chris 
tianity consisted in changing the kingdom of God, from a 
Nation, into a Corporation, namely, in changing its "base" 
from rectilinear to circular functions. 

Again : The function of general administration is more suit 
able to a Corporation, than is any single function of govern 
ment; not only because local and even national government 
itself, is a kind of unartificial spontaneous Corporation ; but 
also because a common Corporation, being a leaf, a product, a 
result, of miscellaneous and compound government, is the best 
FUNDAMENTAL ANALOGY for it, and the most approved kind of 
a type of it. To sum it up, a common Corporation, involving 
as it does, legislative, executive, and judicial functions ; and, 
both elective and pecuniary arrangements, is a form more like 
a complete political government, than almost any other form. 

The Declaration of our Independence, says, " All men are 
created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain INALIENA 
BLE rights, such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." 
The term inalienable expresses the idea which Mulford regards 
as based on a false theory, and there are others who regard the 
reference to a Creator as based upon a false theory. But there 
can be no more doubt that the United States national govern 
ment, is founded upon the theory' of compact, than it is upon the 
theory of equality of rights of Individuals, as given by their 
Creator. Indeed, the two theories amount to one, in the highest 
generalization. How indeed, would it have been possible, for a 
Nation, growing up, as ours from its beginning has done, from 
many Nations, to be resolvable into any other theory than that 
of compact? Whatever, therefore, may be the case with other 
Nations, ours is based upon the theory of compact, in which 


certain rights are made by the Creator, utterly inalienable ; and 
which, no degree of force, and no length of time, and no past 
consent by the governed, can ever destroy. 


1. In their Nature. 

Remembering we frequently say, that all kinds of govern 
ment, are a sort of Corporations for their respective Localities, 
the question may now be asked, and answered : What are the 
differences between the Corporations strictly so called, and Pre 
cinct, or Nation, which are as if sorts or kinds of Corporations 
IMPLIED in the fundamental constitution of society ? 

The historical difference is this, namely; The Precinct is 
merely a transformation of the neighborhood-element of the 
tribe. This element of neighborhood, in the first or migratory 
condition of tribes, was merely a moving organized Social Circle ; 
but subsequently became localized, by the enlargement of the 
tribe, and by the change from the migratory to the settled and 
agricultural condition. But social inequalities arise, even in the 
migratory condition, hence, even then arise the Social Circles. 
All governments of Localities como chiefly from the feelings, or 
the emotive part of our nature. But the Corporations arise 
from the reasoning faculties, from the suggestions of special 
works, not undertaken by the tribe as a whole, nor by its rulers ; 
and either the works, or the methods, not agreed upon by all 
the reasoners and thinkers. Those who agree upon any work 
and method, unite together for that purpose only, and organize 
for that end. 

The essence of the great difference, between Corporation and 
the other Elements, consists chiefly in this ; that the strictly 
called Corporations derive their power from the Instinctive and 
Fundamental Elements of society; or at least act under their 
control, and are therefore of a derivative or subordinate kind ; 
but the other Elements of the Analytics are instinctive ones, 
and may be called primitive ; and can never be entirely dis 
placed. In other words, and socially speaking, Social Circle, 
Precinct or Nation, can no more be entirely eliminated, than 
Family or Individual can be. 


Therefore, the relation of Corporations to their organic supe 
riors, differs from the relation of Precincts to their superiors, 
in this ; that the Precincts own by nature their privileges, as 
Precincts ; but the Corporations derive them from the rights of 
other Units, namely, from the Individual, the Family, or the 
Social Circle ; as admitted or recognized by the superior. And 
thus, in a certain sense, Corporation-rights may be said to de 
pend upon the superior powers ; but Precinct-rights do not so 
depend ; although their actual powers of course do so. In other 
words, the case is one of Individuals &c., asking for their lib 
erties and rights in one particular method. And there arises, 
therefore, a much greater right of the superior to exercise judg 
ments, especially as to the methods. But this difference need 
not necessarily be felt very deeply in practice ; because a govern 
ment, or society at large, may spontaneously give to Corpora 
tions, many or even nearly all the powers of either or of both. 

There is, however, another essential difference between Cor 
porations and local organizations, namely; The Precinct itself 
may often be the superior to a Corporation, although, of course, 
it could not be superior to itself. Corporations, therefore, al 
though intellectually so great, yet need to be humble before the 
local governments, the essential and instinctive natural units of 
society. Morally, they have rights, but not perhaps to be as 
serted by force, against truly organized systems of local govern 
ments, with Precinct-rights duly preserved. 
2. In their Operation. 

The consideration of the Precinct, established rights and prin 
ciples, which are, in general, equally as demandable and obtain 
able by Corporation ; and sometimes, but only in less degrees, 
by some of the other Elements. Nevertheless, the Corporation- 
principle possesses some ;d vantages over the Precinct and Na 
tion ; and over their principles and methods of obtaining human 
rights, and securing human happiness. This Corporation-prin 
ciple or method, is much more economical, and much less dis 
ruptive of the ties of kindred and acquaintance. It allows the 
parties to continue to reside and intermingle among each other, 
a policy which in the past has been useful in allaying animosi 
ties, and promoting progress. 

Being next in naturalness to Precincts, and needing to precede 


them in the reformation, Corporations, in the mean while, are 
the substitutes. They are also the procurers of. many particular 
rights of the Precinct : Because, they are the NEXT most natural 
and most spontaneous Element of human society, in which it is 
possible for small bodies of men to organize themselves politic 
ally ; the Element " Nation" being entirely too extensive, and 
also too radically different, to be thought of as a recourse in 
this connection, or in this era of the world. 

In their primary operations, while the Precinct-theory pro 
vides government for persons who are near to each other, 
physically or geographically; the Corporation-theory provides 
government for those who are near to each other metaphysically 
or morally. And in their fullest development, the Precinct 
provides companies for Localities ; the Corporation provides as 
sociations both for metaphysical and moral bases. Thus it is, 
that the highest and best obtained uses of Precinct, are involved 
fundamentally in the very idea of the Corporation, and are 
directly sought for by it. 

Thus it is, that, although the physical condition, Locality, 
which constitutes the distinction between the former two, 
namely, Precinct and Nation, and the latter one, is a condi 
tion, the retention of which, facilitates the calculation of the 
physical and lower phenomena of society, and the attainment of 
their corresponding objects : yet its complete elimination fur 
nishes a calculus which facilitates the investigation of the meta 
physical and transcendental phenomena of society, and the 
attainment of their corresponding objects, or, which will do so, 
whenever our lower geometry and algebra, have been sufficiently 
perfected for such a transcendental elimination. 

The great points of difference between the two systems, in 
practice, would be as follows, the Corporation-system would be 
easiest and pleasantest for private citizens as Individuals, but 
the Precinct-system would be easiest for faithful government 
officials : the Corporation-method would be easiest taken ad 
vantage of, by dishonest persons, (whether in or out of office) in 
its actual administration, after being fully inaugurated ; but the 
Precinct-system would be most likely to be taken dishonest 
advantage of, in its inauguration. 




& 1. Blackstone' s Classification. 

A Corporation, according to Blackstone, is defined to be " an 
artificial person constituted to maintain perpetual succession, 
and enjoy legal immortality, in order to preserve PERSONAL, 
rights." But in our Social Science, Corporation sometimes 
means the principle whereby citizens of different Localities asso 
ciate together for special purposes, abstract from locality ; at 
other times it means a particular association, constituted for such 
a purpose, and consisting of special Individuals of various Lo 
calities, and selecting themselves for the purpose, without neces 
sitating change of domicile. The latter part of Blackstone's 
definition should be kept distinctly in mind as to the object 
namely, " in order to preserve PERSONAL rights" ; and he means 
the rights of the INDIVIDUAL. 

Blackstone says, " Corporations may be erected by Custom, 
by Prescription, or by act of Parliament." When Prescription 
means the long usage of Corporation-rights by a particular Cor 
poration, its condition before legal recognition constitutes what 
we call a virtual Corporation. When custom means common 
custom, such as constitutes the common law, it contains an intel 
ligible meaning; but there is no such custom in the United 
States, ^except as to virtual Corporations, in whose case there 
exists enough of the law to prevent the persons engaged from 
being considered partners. But only legislative enactments, or 
special proceedings according to such enactments, constitute Cor 
porations in the United States. 

Blackstone says Corporations may be divided thus : 
Either Aggregate and Sole, 
Or Ecclesiastical and Lay, 
Or Civil and Eleemosynary. 

But this classification is not sufficient for social science ; nor 


indeed do we recognize any such thing as a Corporation sole. 
The nearest approach to it, in our classification, is partnership. 
THAT is the smallest Corporation we can admit of, even in the 

2. Our Preliminaries. 

In order to consider this subject fairly, it is necessary for us 
to make some classifications very different from the old ones. 
Furthermore, inasmuch as the term " Corporation" is not com 
monly understood in that wide extent, or with that wide signifi 
cance, that we are about to give it; or perhaps it would be 
more proper to say, that the classes of Corporations of which 
we are about to treat principally, are scarcely ever found, even 
in theories or in books ; and as the kinds of uses also are not 
common ; we will have to introduce several further classifications. 

Referring then, to our classification of the fundamental per 
sonal Elements of the Analytics, we remember, that whilst we 
had six Instinctive, we had only one Deliberative, Element. 
There is therefore nothing in the classification of the Analytics, 
so unique, and without sub-divisions, as Corporation ; unless in^- 
deed it be the Summary Introduction, on Social Science in gen 
eral. Corporations have to be classified somewhat like, GENUS 
HOMO, species man. This singularity however, refers only to 
their location as a whole, or as an Element. But when we 
come to their sub-divisions, the exactly opposite characteristic be 
comes apparent ; and Corporations open up more diversified and 
complicated sets of classifications, than either of the other di 
visions. And although they have their historical origin in the 
tribe and its principles, yet their susceptibilities of almost indefi 
nite development and application, entitle them, in the classifica 
tion, to a position of almost unparalleled importance. Hence 
we now propose to give a classification of the classifications, em 
bracing Ten different mentionable characteristics ; the last one of 
which will be the basis in our Third Main Division ; and sev 
eral of the other nine, will aid in understanding that Division. 


(A) Classification of the Characteristics. 
Corporations need to be looked at in many different views ; 
and in each view, it would be possible to make a separate classi- 


fication of them all according to their different Characteristics. 
We will present Ten such different views or Characteristics of 
possible classifications, with a few remarks upon each, before 
proceeding to the consideration of those Corporations which are 
expressly governmental. First: Classifiable as to their relations 
to "the Law"; namely, Legal or Virtual. Second: Classifiable 
as to secrecy; namely secret or not secret. Third: Classifiable 
as to monopolization ; namely, whether monopoly or not mo 
nopoly. Fourth: Classifiable as to their relations to personal 
intercourse ; namely, whether associations involving sociable 
intercourse; or companies not involving sociable intercourse. 
Fifth: Classifiable as to the official nature of Individuals; 
whether membership constitutes office, or whether it does not. 
Those in which membership itself does constitute office, are only 
$erai-Corporations ; as for instance, Partnerships and possibly 
Families. Sixth : Classifiable as to their objects in view : These 
objects may be divided into Physical or Metaphysical ; The 
Physical may be for Pleasure, or Trade, or Transportation, or 
Currency. The Metaphysical, might also be called Transcen 
dental, and may be for Morality, or Religion, or Charity, or 
Education. Seventh: Classifiable according to their nature, 
whether simple or compound. Eighth: Classifiable as to the 
means they may- use, whether Governmental, or Voluntary, or 
Mixed. The Governmental, may be either for Civil, or for Polit 
ical objects. The Voluntary may be either for Morals, for Prop 
erty, or for Person. The Mixed may be either for Uniformity, 
for Obedience, or for Separation. The Mixed mean those which 
are* of a Semi- Family nature. Ninth: Classifiable as to their 
relations to, or control over, Localities, whether embracing or 
governing their localities, or whether NOT embracing or gov 
erning them. This classification is general enough, to embrace 
the Governmental Corporations, which we treat at length in 
the Third Main Division; and was the classification formerly 
adopted by us for them. Tenth : Classifiable as to their Gov 
ernmental and Political nature, namely, whether Governmental, 
or not. 

The Governmental ones constitute, as just said, the Third 
Main Division. We, therefore, only need say here, that they 
are classified into two Sub-Divisions, namely, First, a Lower 


or Derivative order, exercising special functions under present 
governments. And second, a higher order, exercising inherent 
political functions; and based upon ideas. This higher order 
would require, and involve, a very considerable reorganization 
of society. 

Now let us make a few general remarks on each of the before- 
mentioned Ten Characteristics of Corporations. 
I. As Related to "The Law." 

The first and simplest basis of classification of Corporations 
(for the present purpose), is, that which rests upon their relation 
to " The Law," their authority in the law, to exist. Because, 
whilst one kind is legal, duly authorized by statute ; the other 
kind is only virtual. A Corporation of the latter kind, is real 
and efficient to its own members, within certain limits ; but is not 
so to the outside world ; and is always liable to disorders, from 
ils abnormal relation to the law. Such a Corporation is in the 
same relation to law, that ancient Corporations were, whilst 
in the incompleted process of establishment by "prescription." 
"AND NOW," in the United States, several of the communes, 
although operating without charters, and without even that legal 
sacrament, " a common seal," have undergone suits, and come 
out victorious, upon the very ground affirmed by the civil courts, 
that they are not partnerships, but, virtual corporations. 

Our theory, in regarding partnerships as a sort of Corpora 
tions, is confirmed by the fact, that the chief or only diiference 
which " the law" makes, between Corporations, is the same that 
it makes between partnerships ; namely, the differences based 
on the degree of liability of the Individual members ; namely, 
Limited, "or Unlimited. 

The old English law, until very lately, was as arbitrary and 
absurd, about Corporations, as it was, and as ours still is, about 
partnerships ; namely, refusing to allow the limited responsibility 
of the Individual members, according to their own free choice 
and judgment ; as arranged between them and their creditors, 
spontaneously and voluntarily. J. S. Mill has shown the com 
plete justice, and expediency of such a freedom for partnership. 
And it is equally as demonstrable for Corporation : and will be 
seen to be so, when the old despotic policy of tyrannical or ava 
ricious law-makers, shall cease its wretched course, of doling out 



human rights drop by drop ;, and only at all, lest blood should 
flow, or lest they should lose their offices. 

The difference between Limited and Unlimited Corporations 
is so great, that probably it ought to have been made by us, into 
a separate classification, additional to the Ten. But that per 
haps it is virtually included in our Fifth class, namely, as to 
whether membership therein, of itself constitutes office, or not, 
(See o below.) Because, no partnership nor Corporation ought 
to involve unlimited liability, without also, and at least, consti 
tuting each such accountable member, an officer and ruler of it, 
per se; and not merely a stock voter. Society and law should 
always extend their saving power and wisdom, to counteract 
the evils of their own producing. 

2. As to Secrecy. 

The question of secrecy is always one of degree. Secrecy is 
justifiable or otherwise ; according to its object, and according 
to the right of other people, to know. There is an imperfec 
tion in all human character, that will not justify an uncovering 
of our hearts to other persons, only in proportion as they are in, 
not only corresponding, but also suitably perfect degrees, botlf 
of affection and intelligence. For, without affection, men de 
spise the faults in others, which they themselves possess ; and 
without intelligence, they would despise the confidences of in 
tellect. This principle, in its utmost activity, is one of the prin 
ciples that require simple marriage and personal privacy. In 
all governments, whether Families, societies, cliques, parties, or 
even Xation itself, the innermost c ' wheel within wheel," is a 
silent, a secret, an "Unknown power/' On the other hand, 
secrecy may be based upon a design to-do wrong things, and, 
which we are really ashamed or afraid should become known. 
Or it may be based on a design to do mutually selfish things, 
namely, for the members to help each other especially, whilst at 
the same time receiving help from non-members, the same as if 
non-members themselves. And, thirdly, secrecy may be merely 
the provision of means of recognition, whereby persons mutu 
ally acting together in purposes, but separated in localities, may 
become known to each other, on occasion. In this case, the 
ultimate object of the association, and also its surrounding cir 
cumstances, are to be considered. 


But when we would apply the thought to Politics, there is a 
difficulty to reconcile the universal approval of secret ballot, 
with the general opposition to secret societies. This much, how 
ever, can safely be said, that in proportion as the rights of all 
the Fundamental Elements of society are practically acknowl 
edged ; and especially the rights of Individuals, Precincts, and 
Corporations ; and so far as the forms of legal and social pro 
ceedings, are improved generally ; just so far, all good reasons 
or excuses for the secrecy of political associations will be re 
moved. And finally, a completely prevalent communism, would 
remove the uses of secret recognition in the good and moral 
secret societies ; and there would then remain as justifiable se 
crecies, only those between marital partners, or those between 
choicest friends. 

3. As to Monopolization. 

All that occurs to say of this, is, that the monopolization, if 
any, should always be of limited duration ; and in proportion to 
population; and if of an internal Corporation, its charter or 
rights should NOT be more difficult to alter by the authority of 
the Government, than the Constitution of the Government itself: 
nevertheless, in all forced alterations, compensation for financial 
injuries should be made, as truly as to Individuals. These prin 
ciples apply to the monopolization of governmental and political 
power, by Precincts and Nations, in the displacement of tribes 
and governmental Corporations ; as well as to common organ 
izations. Corporations for building roads, need a limited mo 
nopoly ; but Banks on a proper commodity basis, would not 
need any ; but only, evidence of the possession of a sufficiency 
of the BASIS, and of morality. 

4. As to Relations to Personal Intercourse. 

One of the most evident differences between Corporations, is 
made upon the principle, whether they involve personal social 
intercourse, or not. Those which do involve social and sociable 
intercourse, we may call associations, because the members are 
associates. We might include, under this head, such of the 
functions of the Family as belong under the head of Corpora 
tion, inasmuch as their members associate together. But we 
postpone them to another head, which seems to us more appro 


Those Corporations which do not involve personal social in 
tercourse, are called companies; the members accompanying each 
other in the special occupation for which they are incorporated, 
but not associating together; at least, not as a matter of course. 
Partnerships, if they come under the head of Corporations at 
all, as we endeavor to show that they do, might be placed here; 
inasmuch as the members are not necessarily associates in the 
relations of private life. But we reserve them also to a place 
further on, which seems more appropriate. 

Associations are much more complex and special, than com 
panies. They involve that difficult subject, the Social Circle ; 
and many societies therefore fail, because they attempt to be as 
sociations, when they might succeed, if they only attempted to 
be companies. It is obvious, however, that a company might 
exist, which would accomplish the more complex and especial 
functions of an association, by sub-dividing itself into two or 
more associations, according to the different Social Circles of 
which it consisted. 

5. As to the Relation of Membership, to Office in them. 

(a) In General. In classifying Corporations, according to 
specialty of organ for function, and according to objects in 
view ; one principle of the division might be, whether member 
ship in itself constitutes office, or not. Those in which mem 
bership does constitute office, consist of partnerships on the one 
hand, and Families on the other. These might be called Semi- 
Corporations, inasmuch as only a part of their nature can be 
investigated under this head. 

Most societies, as they allow all the members an equal right 
to speak, are partly of the nature here expressed ; especially was 
this the case originally in the society of " Friends" or Quakers, 
in which, membership carried with it the right of being a "min 
ister," a speaking-officer; although subsequently the right re 
quired confirmation by other officers. But it w r as only the 
right of a speaking-officer (an officer peculiar to the Christian 
churches, and existing in most of them)-, it was not the right of 
a ruling-officer, which is the only thing of much account in 
direct politics. 

Whenever membership in a Corporation involves unlimited 
liability of the Individual, the law ought to empower him to be, 


per se, a ruling officer in the concern ; and that too, even if he 
was willing and should agree to forego his claim thereunto. See 
above under 5. 

(b) Partnership. Here we might say a few words to the 
legists, who of course will dispute our theory of Corporations 
" in toto" ; and in particular, will probably ridicule the very idea 
of including partnerships under the head of Corporations. And 
now, gentlemen, pray tell us, what is a limited or special part 
nership ? and what is the difference between it and a Corpora 
tion ? Ah ! It has no corporate seal. Alas, indeed ! But we 
answer : regarding the active members of a partnership as the 
officers of the concern, then the limited partners are merely 
stockholders, without having the amount of their investments 
divided up into a formal and arbitrary number of shares ; ex 
cept under the general name -of so many dollars, or so many 
pounds ; so that the difference is not in essence, but only in form ; 
yea, and only in the form of the name. But what the partner 
ship lacks in form, it more than makes up in spirit ; because the 
officers, in this case, seldom find themselves able to cheat the 
stockholders with trickery, book-keeping, and " long-winded" 

The folly of the present law of partnership, in not recognizing 
it as a Corporation, is, that ordinarily it makes all the partners 
responsible without limit, for the acts of either one of them. 

The principal thing which Social Science has to investigate, in 
regard to partnerships, is, their further and enlarged capacity to 
fulfill functions that Corporations now have, or might have, en 
trusted to them. The head of the government of Rome once 
consisted of a triumvirate of three partners, and of late years the 
government of France was a consulate of two parties, so that 
history does not entirely desert us in this theory. But still, these 
were not permanent Corporations, nor was the concurrence the 
result of free selection by the Individuals. The problem for 
Social Science here is, to fit free, voluntary partnerships, for all 
the various functions of Corporations ; including also governing 
and political functions. 

(e) The Family. By including the Family under the head 
of Corporation, all that is meant, is to recall the fact, that some 
of the functions of the Family are of a corporate r.ature, and 


belong to Corporation ; because it is an institution organized for 
special purposes, by the voluntary agreement of the parties. And 
as we intimated in the Summary Introduction, Part I. Chap. 
IX., 1, in reference to classifications, that a truly scientific one, 
ought to be general enough to allow all parties to arrange their 
ideas under its order : and not seek to forestall freedom, or to 
establish doctrines, by cunning contrivances. It is better to meet 
the question purely on its own merits, when it comes up under 
its proper " book," The FAMILY, in another volume. 

Another thought however, belongs here under this head, 
namely, that the more, marriage and the Family-organization 
are entered upon voluntarily and deliberately, as in Modern 
Society; and consequently the less they are entered upon by 
mere animal propensity, the less the principles and rights and 
duties of mere instinct or feeling, apply to them ; and the more 
like voluntary CORPORATIONS they may become, without vio 
lence either to expediency, morality, or the will of God. This 
idea sheds more light on the evidently changing views of the 
most civilized peoples, relative to divorce, than anything we 
have yet thought of. 

We have seen in the Introduction, that the deliberative and 
ratiocinative grounds of the Family, created a difficulty in the 
Highest Main Division ; rthat between the instinctive and the 
deliberative Elements of society. We there unhesitatingly 
adopted the term instinctive, for the first division, and in 
cluded the Family in it. But still, it would not be justice to 
the whole truth ; nor to the views of a large class of social sci 
entists, nor to the generalness of a strictly scientific classifica 
tion, to omit the Family entirely from the deliberative Elements. 

We must also bear in mind here, according to our type-theory, 
that Family is type of Corporation ; and Corporation, in turn, 
is type of Family : and that therefore both throw light upon 
each other reciprocally. 

We find everywhere in history, Families, which do, in fact, 
conduct certain mercantile, banking, insurance, and other busi 
nesses. And we also find many instances of Families whose 
members do, in fact, exert a controlling influence in politics, for 
generations, even in the United States. But this principle has 
not as yet found any method of expressing itself by corporate 


organization, according to Republican principles, except in one 
or two instances of communism. 

Here the question arises, whether it is possible to entrust to 
Families, AS SUCH, any of the functions of Corporations. The 
political and civil functions seem to have been entrusted to 
Families, in a certain limited way, in hereditary governments; 
but that is not at all what we mean. We mean no further hered 
itary principle, than in the limited degree, which the laws of 
the United States now allow to property. The question is, in 
regard to parents and their immediate children or issue. But, 
after Social Science shall have given to partnerships, all their 
rights, and worked out their problem ; then the problem of the 
corporate uses of Families, may perhaps become plainer. We 
are not able, as yet, to do anything with it. 

6. As to Objects in view. 

These would be almost endless, unless we take a few COMBI 
NATIONS of chief objects, as portrayed in the latter part of the 
Third Main Division of this " book." But they may here be 
classified into Physical and Metaphysical, and then their re 
spective Sub-Divisions might be as follows : 

(a) The Physical. The physical Corporations and objects, 
may be divided into Trade, Transportation, and Currency. 

As to Trade or Business matters, our modern world is so 
full of them, that we need only say a little. One thing is, that 
as governments have proved so inefficient to attend to their own 
business-matters, or to obtain Individuals to attend hereunto 
for them, it would be well for them to authorize large Corpo 
rations for all such purposes, as fast as the governments can be 
made honest enough to resist the large bribes of such Corpora 
tions. Another thing to be suggested here, is, -that there is some 
radical defect in some of the American social laws, which tend 
io hinder, rather than promote, the keeping of all the members 
of a Family usually in the same business, as is common in 
Europe. The Family is a Corporation made by nature, able to 
conduct a business economically and happily, in mutual love 
and confidence. 

As to Transportation and Roads, the first error seems to be, 
the ignoring entirety, the peculiar rights of the adjacent land 
owners. Because those owners virtually and locally are a part 


of the Corporation of the road. If, after a street or common 
road was graded, and ordered by law to be opened, if the final 
legal process to open, involved under general law, the incorpo 
ration of the land-holders along the street or road, then the 
work over the road would be accomplished at vastly less ex 
pense, either in money or in morals, and would be much better 
done. Moreover, even in the case of turnpikes and Railroads, 
it would be better if the land-owners, as such, along the line, 
were invested with some small proportion of the stock, even if 
the public paid for their proportions thereof. Because, all lands 
ought to carry with them some share of control over the roads 
adjacent to them, independent of the interest in their original 
construction, which sometimes is, but sometimes is not, worth 

The Precincts in which roads lie, should also have a small 
right of ownership in the Road-Corporations, and for the same 
reasons as the adjacent land-owners should have. 

We must admit that the Railway companies are terribly cor 
rupting powers over governments ; but it is equally as clear, 
that they can do their work far better and far cheaper, than 
governments do. But a question arises here, and is left for 
subsequent thinkers ; can Corporations for transportation be ob 
tained, without chartering especially for the purpose, and merely 
by employing organs already in existence ? 

If every Railroad-ownership 'consisted of two separate com 
panies, one of the Road-way, and the other of Transportation, 
and under due legal regulations, by principles, not by details ; 
perhaps things would be better, as each such Corporation would 
serve as a check to the other. But the main source of improve 
ment would be, for both law and public opinion, to prevent any 
Railroad-officer from reaping indirect profits for himself at the 
expense of the company, no matter what were the methods or 
the circumlocutions thereof. The Express Companies that avail 
themselves of the Road-Companies, are generally found more re 
liable, and less risky, as transporters, than the Road-Companies 
themselves. Hence the conclusion, that the mails could be thus 
carried, better, safer and more economically, than by the govern 
ment, and with less corruption of the government. Besides, 
they would conveniently be responsible for losses as common 


carriers, or otherwise, which the United States government refuses 
to be. The Road-Companies themselves are also accountable in 
this sense; and some of the best of them are perfectly irre 
proachable, in doing their own express business. 

For the protection of travelers and their property, a special 
Corporation is formed in England, and is evidently necessary 
elsewhere ; because the great power of the Road-Companies, and 
the smallness of most of the particular losses, generally shut 
out redress beyond all hope, except in the generosity of the 
company's officers. 

A general principle is evolved from these cases, namely, that 
every large Corporation needs, that an opposing or correspond 
ing Corporation should be formed or authorized, for every class 
who do business with it, whether, as customers or as employes 
or as opponents : and the same may be said of every large sys 
tem of Corporations, although each one of them might be of 
small importance. 

Nothing but Corporation can resist Corporation. Corrupt 
therefore as Corporations sometimes become, they yet counteract 
each other's evils, and help regulate society; and are all the 
more necessary to be legitimized in this country ; because the 
disorderly persons do and will form into virtual, although illegal, 
Corporations, and into legal Corporations with secret ulterior 
objects; suppressing personal liberty, and interfering with the 
natural course^ of commerce and manufactures. Just as in for 
mer times, Corporations were the only powers that could resist 
the feudal nobility, and the kings ; so in modern times, Corpo 
rations are the only powers that can resist the mobs, and the 
demagogues, in their various clubs and associations. Nor, are 
the large Corporations any more corrupt than the less and more 
popular ones, or than .the disorderly mob-ones, many of which 
are quite as much perverted by their leaders, from the real or 
avowed objects of their members, as are the larger ones. 

An important question here is, what are the real causes of the 
corruption of the large road and transportation companies? 
One reason seems to be, that their geographical nature, and com 
mon use, make them well known to the public, O that they 
seem to be old acquaintances ; and therefore the public readily 
LENDS them money in permanent loans. Banks are more secure 


than the transportation companies. The reason is, they have no 
permanent loans, because, both as to their discount and circula 
tion, they may be called upon for payment of them at any time, 
without notice. When Banks meant to swindle, they formerly 
located in some " wild cat" region, where they could not easily 
be called upon, for payment. 

One method to cure the evil in the Transportation-Compa 
nies therefore, would be, to constitute all the bond-holders a 
Corporation separate from the share-holders; and with a right 
to be the sole administrative power, as soon as a road became 
unable to pay its obligations promptly. 

But a still better method would be, to do away entirely with 
permanent loans at a fixed interest, and convert them into some 
kind of preferred stock, with only a limited dividend as a maxi 
mum. A simpler rule would be, to have equal amounts of com 
mon stock and preferred stock, issued, subject to equal power in 
voting : but the common stock never to have dividends allowed, 
until a certain dividend, at a certain prescribed rate, had been 
allowed and paid to the preferred stock, and all arrearages, 
if any, had been made up thereunto. The rate for the pre 
ferred stock, to be not fixed by law in a given figure, but to 
be, say, the average, actual and legal rate, usual in other safe. 
and preferred investments, as bonds, mortgages, and municipal 
loans, &c. Arrearages should also be at compound interest, at 
this rate. 

Or, if such an arrangement is too far ahead of the age, per 
haps it would be practicable, to have the rate of interest for 
preferred stock fixed for a given number of years, say 25 or 50 
years. And at every expiration of said term, to have the owners 
of one kind of stock, appraise the total value of the company, 
arid the owners of the other kind, to choose whether to buy or 
sell at that rate ; the party buying, would of course be the new 
common stockholders, and would raise new preferred stock in 
sufficient amount for the next term of 25 or 50 years, at a rate 
of interest then satisfactory to capitalists. 

Another reason for the corruption of these companies, is the 
accomplishment of their elections, by general tickets; whereby, 
even at best, the entire board is elected by a mere majority of 
all those voting for boards of directors, instead of by the prin- 


ciple, that each director shall be elected by his own fractional 
proportion of the stock. 

To impute their evils to the system of voting by proxy, is 
wrong ; because the proxy is a just principle ; and its abolition 
would place the companies under still smaller cliques than now. 
But distant proxies should be allowed only from old holders. 

Another reason of the corruption of these companies, is, their 
being instituted by special, instead of general charters; so that 
often there is bribery in their origin, bribery in their progress, 
and bribery to prevent the chartering of rival lines, so that some 
at least of the officers of some such successful roads, must be 
skillful Generals in bribery. 

The Postal Organ is of doubtful position in the classification, 
inasmuch as IT, compared with "express" companies, or other 
forwarders, performs a much larger proportional amount of local 
office work. For instance. The office expenses of other for 
warders, will perhaps only be one-twentieth of their amounts 
paid for freight ; but the office-expenses of the Postal Organ, 
would perhaps be almost or quite equal to the amounts paid for 
freight. Hence, the Mail-service, although really a kind of 
transportation, comes rather under the principles of a local busi 
ness. It is well known that private persons, or Corporations, 
would do the Mail-business cheaper and more satisfactorily to the 
public, and would at the same time be responsible for losses as 
Common carriers ; which the government refuses to be, even for 
registered letters. And a further advantage would be, the with 
drawal of the vast 'power, which the filling of the Post Office 
gives, to every political administration. Besides, its management 
has always been sectional ; formerly in the interests of the South ; 
now in the interests of the West. For one letter weighing one 
fourth of an ounce, to charge two cents from one street to another, 
in the same city or county, and then, for a newspaper weighing 
four ounces, to carry all the way from Maine to California, for the 
same price ! We would not object so much to charging the cities 
as high as the country, provided the profits thereof were ex 
pended IN the cities, in counteracting their vices, miseries, and 
general ill health. But as it is, the system is unjust, and is an 
other of the methods taken to stimulate the premature settlement 
of the public lands ; and to promote scatteration generally. 


The same kind, although a less extensive, superiority of private 
enterprise, is equally certain in Telegraphy. But some persons 
are arguing for a postal telegraph. Perhaps the newspaper-men 
want this " improvement," (of a postal telegraph) ; or perhaps 
the land-speculators want it. Or perhaps it is desired to have 
the Postal Telegraph "run" as the Post Office itself is "run." 
Or perhaps the Lines want to sell out at a good profit : " Gov 
ernment is rich." Or perhaps what is wanted is, increase of 
official patronage ; or else a monopoly of facilities for getting 
advantage of the earliest news. But cheap telegraph news at 
the public expense, answers for a popular cry. Perhaps cheap 
expressage at the public expense, will be the next cry ; and then, 
perhaps free travel ; and then, what next ? Perhaps : Free 
property ? or what ? Or ; do these tendencies arise, not so 
much from the propensity to break down the rights of property ; 
as from the propensity to increase the CENTKAL power? It may 
be both together : and then the power of the latter might be used, 
all the more effectually, to break down the rights of the former. 

As to currency, we can readily imagine how different would 
have been the finale of the United-States Government-Loans, 
in the war of the Rebellion, if the government, instead of select 
ing an organ already possessing a well-established reputation, 
and in good working order, had attempted to organize, in the 
haste of war, banking firms or companies, expressly for the pur 
pose. No doubt, banking Corporations could be formed, that 
would at least be safe, by taking time and care in their con 
struction. But after being constituted, it is" not easy to reform 
their errors, or to change them. Whereas, an agency well -se 
lected from among existing ones, if it should prove unsatisfac 
tory upon trial, could be changed at once, unless some foolish 
agreement had been entered into, preventing the change. But 
the main thing here, after all, is, to endeavor to find how Corpo 
rations for all the various purposes of this, and of the subsequent 
divisions, can be induced to grow up spontaneously, like the 
metaphysical or transcendental ones hereafter spoken of; which 
first ari^e to fulfill the functions themselves voluntarily, and 
are afterwards availed of by government, for the fulfillment 
of similar functions to those for which they had originally been 
incorporated. And yet, the tendency of modern laws in the 


United States, is, to forbid all spontaneous attempts of this kind; 
nor would the free allowance of them probably be safe, so long 
as either gold or the precious metals with their consequents, and 
paper, are made the basis of currency : or perhaps also, so long 
as anything else is made such a basis, except well-selected and 
transportable merchandise ; a plan for which, we have given in 
the Summary Introduction, and is to be resumed under the head 

Then the whole matter of Currency would be so simplified, 
as to be nothing very diiferent from any other kind of a credit 

The question of currency, although so generally treated as a 
governmental one, is in principle, one only of trade or business. 
Governments, except in the United States, have generally used 
the function of coining money, as one method of taxation. 

No supreme or national government yet established, is perfect 
enough to be entrusted with the absolute power of fixing and 
altering the currency ; whether of paper or of coin. All that 
the supreme governments are perfect enough to have to do with 
it, is, to regulate and control and enforce the contracts for it, the 
same as for any other articles. And restrictions on govern 
mental-power, are more needed in reference to currency, than in 
reference to any other articles of contract ; because the currency 
is the substance and expression of ALL contracts. Nearly all 
the great Nations of the world have repeatedly debased or de 
teriorated their coins. In 1834 the United States government 
deteriorated their gold coins about six per cent. But only three 
years subsequently, came the great panic of 1837. But only six 
months previously, the silver coin had been deteriorated nearly 
one per cent. Again, in 1854, the government- deteriorated the 
silver coins, about seven per cent, further. And again in about 
three years came the panic of 1857. The last named deteriora 
tion was made to the silver coin, in consequence of the sudden 
and large increase of gold receipts from California and Australia, 
which cheapened gold greatly, in comparison with silver, and 
which were even cheapening ALL money, at nearly the rate of one 
per cent, per annum, and when, therefore, the strictly just course 
would have been, to have increased the value of the gold coin to 
its former value of 1834, instead of again reducing the silver. 


Now, as supreme or national governments are not perfect 
enough to be entrusted with the absolute control over currency ; 
and as Individuals have not sufficient continuity of existence, 
nor sufficient impartiality; therefore Corporations are much 
better instrumentalities for the purpose ; and they, to be held 
accountable by the NATION, as for the performance of other 
contracts. We admit that contracts for currency should be held 
as of national concern, and therefore should be subject to the 
Nation's supervision. 

The only proper governmental tarnperings with the currency ? 
even including the one of altering the standard of coin, are founded 
on v on temporary reasons, and as expedients of relief for extraor 
dinary cases. They are all at best only bungling methods of 
doing what might be much better accomplished by a simple law 
authorizing specified discounts to be deducted, in the payment of 
all debts contracted previous to a specified time; or what is some 
times still better, a stay- law, under adequate security, or by a 
combination of both methods. Because, debased coins are scarcely 
'ever restored ; and debased government-paper is restored, if at 
all, only with the greatest difficulty, and after the lapse of un 
necessary years. 

(b) The Metaphysical. The sub-divisions of the Metaphysical 
or Transcendental objects, would be Morality, Religion, Charity 
and Education. But these are objects of such importance, as to 
require consideration as elements of society, under the heads of 
Intellectuals and Morals, in the Synthetics ; and arc, for the most 
part, deferred to that branch of the subject. We may, however, 
say here, that they are the most important objects that Mankind, 
whether as Individuals or societies, can seek; yet the experience 
of ages has thus far proved, that the more the political govern 
ments "leave these affairs alone/' the better the affairs prosper. 
This ho\vever is not owing to any universal principle in the 
nature of things ; but partly, to the general corruptness of political 
government, and partly to the error of attempting to promote 
transcendental objects, by COMMON FORCE. But yet we see, that 
society spontaneously puts forth organizations, which accomplish 
these special purposes by voluntary means, better than govern 
ments could do by their coercion. Now, when society has spon 
taneously put forth appropriate and efficient organs for these 


purposes, political governments ought to be wise enough to per 
ceive the fact, and to AID the institutions, so far as they can 
reasonably do, without corrupting them. The various political 
governments of the United States, do, in fact, pursue this method 
with moral, charitable and educational societies. But when they 
come to religion, they seem to lose their senses; and argue, because 
men have different preferences in religion, that government must 
therefore do nothing for it; just as if men had not preferences 
and differences, on moral, and on charitable, and on educational 
questions. Accordingly, if England aids the Catholic church 
in Ireland, or the Hindoostanee establishment in India; all 
Protestantism is in excitement. And here, even a public school 
must not have any law, except the prejudices or partialities of 
the Directors, to allow religious services in it. 

But waiving for the present, the question of religion, it is evi 
dent in general, that society has learned a lesson here, which it 
will find of the greatest use to apply to all this class of Corpora 
tions, whether political or not political, and whether metaphysical 
or physical, the lesson of aiding organizations spontaneously 
existing, and thus using them as its own organs. By this method, 
governments would obtain the services of organizations, that had 
already proved their efficacy and merits, by their own spontaneous 

7. As to their Nature ; whether Simple or Confound. 

The Simple Corporations would be those for Morality, Re 
ligion, Charity, Education, and Productive Business. The Com 
pound would be Beneficial Associations, Insurance Companies, 
Churches, Theological Seminaries, Publication and Distribution 
Societies, Hospitals, Asylums and Educational Institutions ; also 
Corporations for Transportation and Currency ; also the Gov 
ernmental Corporations, if there were no special classification 
for them. 

8. As to the Means they may use. 

The next basis of classification of Corporations, is, upon 
the kinds of power they may employ : (1) Whether they may 
employ only voluntary, i.e. moral power, or whether they may 
resort to distraint on property, or whether to coercion of the 
person. (2) As to whether the force used is to be of a Semi- 
Family nature ; and whether, under it, they are to seek con- 


formity, in the sense of uniformity and harmony, or whether, to 
seek absolute obedience, or whether, to resort to the alternative 
of separation and dismission. (3) As to whether the force used is 
to be of a civil governmental kind, namely, whether in addition 
to applying coercion to the Individual, it also is to attempt to 
punish, in order to exert an influence on others. This part of 
the classification would also include political power, and the 
relations of the Corporation to the other political Elements, 
namely, Precinct and Nation. 

9. As to their relations to Locality. 

(a) Corporations NOT embracing and governing their Local 
ities. In general, the law of Corporations without political 
power, ought to be the same as that of Individuals, except that 
their officers should be free from personal liability; and the 
common law is thus far correct, in calling them artificial per 

The first principle to be considered now, in regard to Corpo 
rations, is the simple fact of their existence in or out of the 
Locality or Precinct in which they are intended to transact their 
business. And by the pre-supposition, this class is the one which 
has NO relation to the exercise of political functions in the Pre 
cinct of its location. In regard to this class, it is evident, that 
those which act wholly within the Precinct in which they are 
located, ought to be almost entirely free from all national and 
all other outside interferences ; whatever the nature or business 
of such a Corporation might be, provided it does not have a 
direct tendency to interfere with the rights of persons, or organ 
izations, outside of the Precinct or Locality. This principle 
against interference, becomes more and more absolute, exactly 
in proportion to the social power actually exerted, of confining 
the influence of such Corporations substantially to the Precinct 
in which they are located, so far as it is reasonable to suppose 
that the influence of Individuals, may be confined to or within 
the same limits but no farther restrictions. Even then, there 
will remain this difference, of greater power of government over 
Corporations than over Individuals ; inasmuch as from the very 
nature of Corporations, they cannot remove, like Individuals, 
to other Localities, that is, to other Precincts, inasmuch as 
such a removal might forfeit the charter, or essentially change 


the nature, of a Corporation organized expressly to act wholly 
within its own Precinct; and that is the kind of Corporation 
we are now considering. 

But it may be asked, What would you do about Corporations 
organized expressly for immoral or irreligious purposes ? We 
would reply, we would just do with them, what free govern 
ments now do with irreligious organizations, and even what the 
United States ought to have done with rebellious organizations, 
before they proceeded to any overt act of rebellion; namely, 
and by Individuals. We would let them alone ; but with this 
difference in favor of our theory, that it only applies to freedom 
within the Precinct ; and then in that case, the Precinct itself 
would be held morally accountable, in the judgment of the Na 
tion and of Mankind ; and with this other difference, that other 
Precincts have a full and equal right to exclude all such Corpo 
rations, and even their emigrants, their advocates, and their lit 
erature, from their respective localities : so far as they choose to 
do so, and be amenable to the same moral judgments of Nation 
and Mankind. These and other various practical means would 
soon bring them to justice. 

Again, you may ask, What would you do about Corporations 
of this evil class, if established EXPRESSLY for criminal pur 
poses? The answer would be, that those criminal purposes 
which are private in their nature, and have no direct tendency 
to injure others, except by example, might safely, according to 
the principles just before mentioned, be left to the action of 
their own Precinct ; for, that is the locality that sees the ex 
ample, and suffers by it. And it is fundamental to our theory, 
that the right of free removal from one Precinct to another, of 
persons with their property, should be maintained; so that if 
all good citizens should disapprove of any given proceedings^ 
and should despond of the probability of the Precinct being 
reformed, they could readily remove to another. But it is 
to be borne in mind here, that what one age or denomination, 
judges criminal, another does not ; and this difference of opinion 
is another argument for the freedom of Corporations. 

But, as to that other class of criminal purposes, which are not 
private, and which are direct aggressions against established 



rights, and which would tend to foster a class of criminals, who 
would prey upon the rights of persons or property situate out 
side of the Precinct ; such purposes are of course excluded by 
the nature of our supposition. And Corporations established 
for any such purposes, could not at all be considered in the class 
of those who trinsact their business entirely within the Precinct. 
And it is hard ly conceivable, that any such criminal organiza 
tions would b* allowed expressly to act within the Precinct 
itself. And no Precinct recognizes the virtue of another, only 
as it chooses to. 

Now, as to ihat class of Corporations which transact their 
business, partly within and partly out of, their own Precinct ; 
why, so far as they act within their Precinct, they come under 
the class just a ove mentioned ; and so far as they act out of 
their Precinct, i.fley come under the principles of the class we 
are next to discus. 

Now, as to ttut other class of Corporations, which are to act 
wholly out of the Precinct or Locality in which they are situated, 
they are a singular and curious class. For instance, the state of 
New York charters a Corporation located (?) in the city of New 
York, to build a Railroad across the Isthmus of Panama, or 
a telegraph line on the coast of China, or to conduct some busi 
ness in the territory of Montana, or in the city cf Philadelphia. 
In any of these cases, there ought to be no difficulty in seeing 
the true principles of fairness. By the comity of Precincts, 
such as now exist in the United States, and also by express 
statute, a charter given by one Precinct to a Corporation that is 
to act in another Precinct, should be valid in all other Precincts, 
as to the fact of the existence of the Corporation, and the official 
character of its officers. But on the other hand, such a Corpo 
ration, as to its action in those other Precincts, should have no 
Bights of operation whatever, but what are given by the laws of 
the Precinct IN which it is acting. And this state of the case 
refers us again to Corporations WITHIN their Locality. Be 
cause a charter from an outside Precinct, should do no more than 
recognize the mere fact of the artificial personality, and real ex 
istence, of the Corporation ; but is not thereby bound to, either 
allow or enforce, any of the proceedings thereof within its own 
domestic Locality; and perhaps, not even in any other Locality 


than that of the home itself of the said outside Corporation. 
The case is just the same as the nativity of an Individual. The 
nativity of an Individual only constitutes it a human being, but 
does not necessarily give it official or political rights in outside 
Localities, only so far as the latter approve of so doing. 

(b) Corporations Embracing and Govwning their Localities. 
There is a class of Corporations, which exercise only a partial 
degree of political or government-power, of a secondary kind, 
that is to say, a kind that refers to some one idea or combination 
of ideas ; and only derived by express grant from original gov 
erning bodies in the Locality. The consideration of those will 
be taken up in the Third Main Division of Corporations. We 
are now speaking of that kind of Corporations which embrace 
their Localities as a idiote, and are the local governing power 
thereof. For convenience, they might be called Federations. 
The kind of powers which they may rightly exercise, is that 
which in general, is now considered as bestowed upon townships, 
boroughs, and counties. 

Here would be the place to arrange for and treat, "States" 
and Large Cities ; if the reader were not satisfied with our 
locating them under PBECINCT, Part II. Chap. XII. 

But every ordinary form of civil government, whether over a 
township, or a confederation, or an Empire of Nations, is a sort 
of Corporation of the kind here mentioned, namely, the kind 
which governs the Locality which it embraces. But when we 
speak in a more restricted sense, only " states" and large cities 
would come under this category. But we have already con 
sidered these under the head of Precinct, where they more 
properly belong : for according to our theory, governmental 
Corporations consist essentially of persons disseminated in va 
rious inherently political Localities, and can only be considered 
as co-extensive with Localities, in the final success of a system 
of Corporations. 

This class of Corporations might be divided into two kinds : 
one of which is positively regarded, by most persons, as a gov 
ernment ; for instance, boroughs, counties, towns, &c. The 
other of which, is not yet so regarded generally, because they 
only perform, here and there, one or more special functions of 
government. But the distinction, after all, is hardly scientific 


but popular rather. The consideration of this class will be de 
ferred to the Third Main Division. This is the same class which 
has been mentioned above, as possessing only derivative powers, 
or exercising only derivative functions. 

The smaller geographical divisions, do, according to our 
theory, possess, not a secondary or granted degree of power; 
but original inherent rights, at Jeast especially the smallest of 
these divisions; being what we regard as one of the eternal 
Units, the Precinct. But the kind of powder which is usually 
attributed to them, is merely the power we, in our theory, would 
attribute to Provinces, Cities, and what in the American Union 
are called " states." The writer's theory of " state rights," knows 
of nothing of this higher kind of power in " states," except as 
in Precincts or in Nations. The American "states" are merely 
incorporated bodies with double charters. In their case, the 
charter must be considered as originating from and ratified, both 
by the Nation above them, on the one hand, and by the Pre 
cincts of which they are composed, on the other hand. In other 
words, they are governmental political Corporations, with double 

Very nearly the same principles apply to the rights of large 
cities. The intimate providential and balancing relations, which 
exist between these Corporations called " states" and cities, were 
pointed out when treating of cities, under the head of Precinct : 
Part II. Chap. XII. 

10. As to Governmental and Political Functions. 

The next important classification would be; into Corporations 
which are for governmental and political purposes; and those 
which are not for such purposes. This division is only mentioned 
here, in order to complete scientifically the plan, as it appears in 
the analysis, of treating of all kinds of Corporations, in a general 
way, in this Main Division. If we were to enlarge upon it, w r e 
should have to take up the governmental or political ones here, 
also in a general way, before making another Main Division. 
But that would make a useless break in the main subject of this 
article, namely, the subject of Governmental or Political Corpo 
rations ; therefore we place them, both general and special, in the 
next, namely, the Third Main Division. 







1. Analytical Table, of Politico- Governmental Corporations. 





































The doctrine of Governmental or political Corporations, stated 
in the abstract, is, that there may exist a variety of bodies-politic, 
operating upon the same grounds, each attending to its own 
civil and political duties. These would be governmental Cor 
porations. When these Corporations differ only as to their 
functions, we have the First Sub-Division, namely, those which 
exercise functions derived from the Governments of Localities. 
But when these Corporations differ as to the classes of Individuals 
whom they are to govern, each governing its own members, and 
letting all others alone, then we have the Second Sub-Division, 
namely, those which exercise inherent functions based on ideas. 


All the objects and functions considered under this general 
head, belong to, and may properly be considered as referring to, 
all the different kin'ds of Corporations ; and even to the great 
Units of society; inasmuch as they partake of the nature of 
these. Hence, most of the remarks to be made under this head, 
will apply to all Corporations, and partly even, to all other gov 
ernment-organs : although the particular organs of society, first 
to be discussed, are supposed to have only some of the functions, 
and to aim at only some of the objects of government. In other 
words, we are now to consider the newly developed special or 
gans, that are, from time to time, putting forth, each to accom 
plish its own object ; in accordance with the great biological law, 
that, the higher we rise in the scale of the development of being, 
the more we find, that every different function has its own organ, 
specially for its particular purpose. Corporations are the new 
organs, which, as governments develop, must be put forth, so that 
each function may have its own special organs ; and so that each 
organ or each set of organs, may be different from every other 
organ or set. But sometimes, one function calls for several organs, 
as the perspiring skin has its thousands of pores, and the nutritive 
organs have their hundreds of lacteals ; and often, the organs 
for each function, come in pairs, corresponding to the duality in 
naturei And in a few cases, each function has only one organ. 


One important suggestion here is, that government should do 
as little as possible towards the direct or actual creation of Polit 
ical Corporations ; but do as much as would be consistent with 
safety and incorruptness, to induce societies to organize of their 
own accord, for somewhat similar purposes. Government should 
endeavor to call forth its needed Corporations, rather by encour 
aging their formation, than by actually creating them. To carry 
this principle into practice, the greatest freedom of forming 
Corporations would be indispensably necessary. 


Another suggestion is, that Corporations might be promoted 
from one function to another ; but of course, not only in a merely 


outward or formal way. There is first to be considered, an out 
ward promotion, namely, the promotion of a Corporation from 
acting for a Precinct, to the office of performing the same func 
tions for a larger Locality, or a much higher generality. But 
this is not the main promotion we refer to, although it should 
by no means be undervalued. But the kind of promotion we 
chiefly mean, is one, that elevates to higher kinds of function, 
one, that is performed by an inward and living process, the like 
of which is not fd'und in any science less spiritual or metaphys 
ical than Biology, and only there found, by .close observation, 
and in a few cases. For instance, the surplus life-power which 
seems, in infancy, to produce growth, does, after puberty, turn 
to a power to reproduce its kind. And at a still later age, the 
generative power passes away, whilst the life-power is all con 
centrated in maintaining the life of the Individual. 

And it is not inconceivable, nor even entirely absurd, to hope, 
that the time may come, in the case of human Biology, when 
this life-power may be turned to complete the perfection, and 
perhaps even the undying longevity, of the Individual-man. 
Such a hope is, for some reason or other, entertained by the 
Prussian naturalist Karl Ernst von Baer, and by J. H. Noyes 
and his coadjutors. But, if not the Individual, perhaps the race 
may become perpetual, by means of promotions of functions. 

It would be presumptuous, to attempt to foretell exactly the 
order, in which the promotions of Corporations could take place ; 
but we may presently offer some suggestions as to them, in con 
nection with the other particulars. 


Although the theory of Corporations is abstract from Local 
ity, nevertheless, whatever exists at all, must exist somewhere; 
and therefore any actual system of Corporations must have some 
Locality, whether that of Precinct, Nation or Whole Earth. 
And as, the smaller the Locality is, the more any actually new 
system of Political Corporations, wou d be likely to be adopted; 
therefore the Precinct-system seems necessary, in order to give 
perfect practicability to the Corporations. Nevertheless, a large 
system of Precincts is not necessary to precede, because the sue- 

392 BK - IV - CORPORATION, in. ii. ir. 

cess of the Corporations, in a few select Precincts, might be ac 
cepted as a sufficient proof of their practicability in the Nation 
as a totality. On the other hand, the highest differentiations of 
the Corporation-system, seem to require the pre-existence of the 
Precinct- ; so that both systems can only develop together, 
which, as Spencer says, is the method of the development of 
the sciences generally. 




The class of Corporations we are now to consider, are, first, 
those exercising functions derived from political government- 
organizations, namely ; those which exercise only a partial de 
gree of political or governmental power, of a derivative kind, 
obtained by express grant from original governing bodies ; and 
to perform some of their functions, which would otherwise be 
deputed to government persons or officers. Although the real 
difference between these and other Corporations, (subsequently 
to be considered), so far as rights are concerned, consists rather 
in the first kind being regarded by the people generally, as a 
civil government; and the other, not yet so regarded. So that 
the distinction of their rights is popular rather than scientific. 
Thus, this Division of Corporations, bears the same relation to 
Corporations as a whole, that they bear to the Local Govern 
ments. This is so, both in their derivative nature, and in their 
popular non-apprehension. This division may also be distin 
guished from the second, by the consideration, that this is for 
functions, and that is for ideas. 


1. In General. 

Corporations should not act for only one employer or prin 
cipal, but each such Corporation should, as far as possible, be so 
constituted, that it would perform somewhat similar functions 


for a variety of employers or principals, or on its own account 
also. This latter condition, in selecting and constituting them, 
would be similar in principle to, although different in origin 
from, availing, of Corporations already existing for their own 
business-purposes. And when this cannot, from the nature of 
the case, be done; the one Corporation should be allowed to 
fulfill its own peculiar government-functions, for several Pre 
cincts or Localities, so far as possible. This creates opportunity 
of comparison, on the one hand. On the other hand, a Corpo 
ration, if ill used, or if too independent to allow itself to be 
used as a political tool, by one Precinct or Locality, may be free 
to dispense with the patronage of that one, having other Pre 
cincts or Localities, upon which to fall back for employment. 
All this is simply introducing the common experience and wis 
dom of the business world, into political government. 

The full accomplishment of this, requires the constitution, we 
have elsewhere maintained, of a large number of small semi- 
independent, or State-Precincts ; although most of this principle 
might be applied by the present organizations of townships and 
counties, if they were not too much given to requiring those 
who work for them, to reside in the district of their operations. 
For evidently, if, for instance, a police, whether of Individuals 
or of Corporations, is to act for several Precincts, it must be 
left free from the necessity of residing in its place of occupation. 

But what shall we say of the possible application of these 
principles, by national governments? We answer; first; that 
the principles just set forth, for application by Precincts, may 
be applied by Nations, when that national organ called patriot 
ism, shall have become a minimum, or shall have been partly 
absorbed or divided away, among Precincts and Corporations ; 
so that one Nation could trust the Individuals and Corporations 
of or from another Nation, to perform some of its political or 
governmental functions ; just as Precincts or Corporations now 
do; just as the time has passed away (except among Turks and 
Chinese, &c.), when a foreigner was thought not fit even to be 
trusted with the privilege of a common merchant, much less of 
a landholder. But, second, and mainly ; we answer ; that these 
ideas are to be applied to national affairs, by adhering to the 
principle, but reversing it: just as the mucous membrane is 


one with the outside skin, but is reversed. Instead of one Cor 
poration working for several governments, we may need to have 
the national government adopting several Corporations to fulfill 
the same one function, a plurality of organs, two, if that 
bring sufficient comparison; but if not, then as many more as 
may be needed. If the functions to be performed are too few 
for more than one Corporation in a given Locality, then let 
them operate in alternate or neighboring Localities, throughout 
some given field.; just as government has policy enough, in the 
merely material matters of Railroads, &c., to grant its lands 
away in alternate sections, all along the routes ; instead of all 
in one Locality, which the road or company might select. 
2. For Treatment of Criminals. 

The object of the punishment of criminals, is becoming evi 
dently more and more resolvable into the object, " treatment of 
the erring," and so far as this is true, it is manageable by the 
Corporations for the transcendental purposes, namely, Moral 
ity, Religion, Charity and Education. The little of personal 
spontaneous guilt then remaining, in excess of that which is 
generally allowed to run loose in society, would require the in 
troduction of an element scarcely yet to be found in voluntary 
Corporations. Such an element would therefore have to be de 
rived from governments, by special charter, or by some more 
express and special grant than the others : and in this case, both 
the duties and the restrictions, might be clearly set forth by the 
government; and a special acceptance thereof, be required from 
the Corporation. 

As a basis then, to begin the promotions with, observe, that 
some governments have already introduced into the management 
of criminals, a considerable degree of the power of the benevo 
lent and moral Corporations, (namely, those for Morality, Re 
ligion, Charity and Education.) Suppose then, some govern 
ment were to try the experiment, in a limited field, of giving 
the control of criminal almost entirely into the hands of the 
moral and benevolent societies, subject only to the restrictions, 
that the criminals should not be turned loose on the community, 
without the consent of the political government ; and that the 
criminals should not be treated any more severely than "the 
law" for prisons allowed. And suppose such experiments were 


actually to prove, in the end, undoubted successes ; as indeed 
there is hardly any doubt that they would. Here is a basis to 
begin with. Then a successful Corporation of that kind, might 
be promoted to the function of managing professional paupers. 
The managers might be readily induced, voluntarily to under 
take the new function, in addition to the old one, by giving them 
separate buildings, and separate sub-organizations for each func 
tion, at the public expense, of course. Such experiments also, 
we have no doubt, would prove stupendous successes, if the gov 
ernments would only grant the managers sufficient power. But 
we cannot admit that criminals should have the higher or pro 
moted order of care, even if it be true that they require more 
scientific treatment : because justice must ever be preferred to 
merely apparent policy. 

The next step would be to select the most successful of these 
already promoted Corporations, and relieve them altogether from 
the care of criminals, so that they might devote themselves 
exclusively to the " unfortunates," and the paupers, and to re 
storing them to honor and usefulness. By unfortunates we mean, 
the five classes, Fallen women, Habitually intemperate persons, 
Paupers, Persons accused of crime but not yet convicted, and 
Youths in danger of being involved in habitual crime. And each 
of these five classes of persons, should of course be placed in 
charge of a diiferent Society. Promotion, as to these five, might 
begin with the last named one, and perhaps end with the first 
named ; as that is the order of difficulty of the work to be done 
in each case. But more probably, the treatment of only one of 
these classes would be sufficient, in order to qualify for promo 
tion to some higher governmental functions. And voluntary 
societies would not be profited by, nor consent to, very frequent 
changes of their functions, unless organized for that object. 

Those societies which had proved themselves reliable and effi 
cient, in the management and reforms, of criminals, and profes 
sional paupers, and other unfortunates, would certainly exhibit 
and prove a high degree of Legislative, Police, and Judicial 
wisdom. We will then pause here, for the present, with their 
promotions, and take up another line of thought ; confident of 
this at least, that their wisdom and power can be utilized in some 
higher forms, whenever we are ready for them. 

396 BK - IV - COEPOKATION. Til. II. II. 

3. For Collection of Taxes. 

As to the collection of taxes ; all persons ought to know, how 
difficult it is to ascertain each Individual's share thereof; and 
how, by false swearing and other means, much of our taxation 
is really, in the end, more of a tax on honesty and veracity, than 
it is on the income, importation, or business, of the Individual. 
Hence, we need not wonder so much, that Koine adopted the 
policy of selling out the privilege of taxation to the highest bid 
der ! And the successful bidder would probably be the smartest 
man in finding out the real valuation. But we, in modern times, 
ought to improve on that method, and even upon our own. 

Probably the best method for first trial, would be, to intrust 
the whole business of collection of taxes, to those Corporations 
that had already obtained a superior and long-established char 
acter as financial organs, that is, the Banks or the Trust Com 
panies. This would be going to the Physical non-political 
elements, selecting an approved organ, and promoting it to a 
political function, something in the same manner as we have 
just before been considering, in the case of the metaphysical. 
And in both cases, there would in time, probably grow out of 
the new and promoted society, a division, according to the prin 
ciples of the division of labor, whereby, one part would devote 
itself entirely to the new function. Even the very evils and 
troubles of the combined stages, would hasten the time of the 
division, when the old " fogies" would return to their first work, 
and allow the new part of the organ to go on more freely with 
its own functions. 

4. For Police-and-Military Functions. 

Our theory does not recognize war very gladly, nor at all, 
only so far as war is a " necessary evil," as if indeed it ever 
could really be either necessary or expedient at all. Therefore 
we must regard the military power, at best, as only a develop 
ment from the police, in fact, as a promoted order of police 
officers. Hence it is only to a very limited extent, and for a FEW 
persons, that we could appropriate into our theory, the idea of 
an exclusively theoretical military education. But all that is 
good, in the high spirit that prevails among military men, might 
be passed over to the police, although not necessarily to all the 
present Individuals therein. But, by presenting the idea, that 


police services were necessary to promotion in the regular army, 
and gradually even requisite to other executive offices; and by 
supplying police officers freely, with the preparatory military, and 
other executive education, necessary to aid them in those profes 
sions ; and by corresponding examinations of fitness, the spirit 
and self-respect of the order would be highly raised, and better 
classes of men would be drawn into the organization. All this 
would happen, by making the outward organization correspond, 
as far as practicable, to the inward theory and spirit, by main 
taining that justifiable war, and even other executive force, are 
only extended functions of police-duty. 

The proposition has already been made, to incorporate compa 
nies for the purpose of detective police, but we do not know with 
what success. But if they be possible, then there might in time 
grow out of them, the possibility of military authority being 
vested in a Corporation. 

5. For Civil-Executive Functions. 

Executive functions naturally belong to the police and mili 
tary class, although of course, executive faculties are required 
and developed by the headship of every department of govern 
ment, and of every association. The veto-power is a conglom 
erate thing, a mixture of executive with legislative functions,, 
and ought to be withdrawn, to have substituted instead of it, a 
specified largeness of majority. On this basis, then, there is a 
probability that a Corporation could, if required, fulfill execu 
tive functions. But, as the Corporation itself must select its 
Individuals, the institution and the Individual would both be 
performing the same functions, and therefore, it is possible that 
Corporations might be dispensed with, under this head. 

The principle involved in this argument, is one reason why 
a Corporation can never perfectly fulfill all the functions of a 
Nation. For a Nation is, in spirit, the executive power of the 
sum of all its Localities, namely, its Locality as a whole. 
j 6. For Judicial Functions. 

In regard to judicial functions, it is not yet easy to see, 
how these could be advantageously entrusted to a Corporation, 
in any other way than indirectly, namely, as being involved in 
the functions of Corporations previously established for other 


7. For Deliberative Functions. 

Although Legislatures themselves may not be constituted as 
Corporations, yet the political bodies who nominate and elect 
them, might easily be so constituted. We allude to elementary 
spontaneous political organizations. We find in the United 
States, spontaneously originated organizations, of every ward 
county and state, as well as of the whole country, for nomi 
nating and electing candidates. It cannot be doubted that this 
vast outgrowth, can be trained in and directed to further pur 
poses, and at the same time, be so controlled as to accomplish 
those purposes better than they now fulfill their proposed ends. 
By refining them into a suitable system of political clubs, we 
hope hereafter to show (mainly in the article on Civil Govern 
ment and Elections) that this element, voluntary political clubs, 
can be turned into the function of direct election of representa 
tives, whereby the voice of every Individual would continue to 
be heard, each for himself; instead of those organizations only 
nominating candidates for a majority representation, and a con 
glomerate decision. By thus making the influence and func 
tions of these voluntary political clubs, direct instead of indirect, 
we afford a chance for some of them to establish, for themselves, 
a permanent reputation for political fairness, honesty, and wis 
dom, a reputation that might be maintained, generation after 

Supposing, then, a reputation for such a character, to have 
l)een sufficiently established, surely it could be utilized some 
where, and for some higher end, and in some higher method. 
It is too soon yet to see just how, and for what immediate ends, 
this utilization should take place. But it is evidently possible, 
that out of it, ultimately might grow up a great system of civil 
government, by Corporations over their own voluntary members ; 
and thereby to that extent, releasing them from the local or gen 
eral political governments; just as ancient Rome allowed for 
eigners, resident there, to judge themselves by their own laws 
and proceedings. More will be said of this, in a subsequent 
part of this article. In the character, then, established by such 
voluntary political clubs, there is a ground of promoting some 
of them to some higher purpose, to be afterwards discovered. 


1. Classifications. 

If it were not for the fact, that in the United States, the terms 
general administration apply to the National government, this 
class ought to be called Corporations of General Administra 
tion. These are the last and highest kind the world has yet 
seen, of political Corporations, as denned by their objects, 
namely, those for General Administration. These, though apt 
to be confounded with the executive office, are entirely different; 
for they combine and exercise several, or all, the different func 
tions of government, the different kinds above mentioned. But. 
the last named class, namely, those for deliberative functions, 
might possibly be included under this more general head, be 
cause the deliberative function relates to all the others, and even 
relates to itself also : like the power of thought, which studies 
thinking, as well as other things. 

This class, for General Political Administration, readily passes 
into that of Corporations embracing and governing their Locali 
ties ; but must be distinguished also from them. They, we 
found, were cities and states ; they derive their origin partly 
from the Localities in which they exist ; and are so intimately 
connected with the Precincts which they include, that they 
belong rather to the head of Precinct, where we have placed 
them, than to Corporation. But these Corporations we are now 
speaking of, namely, those for general political functions, do not 
necessarily correspond with the Locations which they govern, 
nor do they derive their authority from them. The British East 
India, and Hudson's Bay, and Dutch East India, Companies, 
are instances in point ; so also, are the colonization-companies 
of various ages. These colonization-companies, after becoming 
permanent in their adopted Locations, gradually pass over into 
Corporations actually embracing and governing their Localities. 
But the two are not, on that account, to be confused, any more 
than the citizenships of two different countries should be con 
fused by an Individual changing his citizenship from one to 
another; nor, for instance, than Normandy must be confused 
with England, by William of Normandy becoming King of 


2. Uses. 

The function of general administration, is more suitable to 
a Corporation, than any single function ; because, as has been 
already said, that element is the best type of civil government ; 
which, in all forms, is a kind of unartificial Corporation consti 
tuted by nature, in general, and especially in the United States. 

History helps us more with examples of this kind, than with 
those that exercise only one political function. In fact, both for 
the formation of new settlements, and for the government of 
permanent colonies, History shows, how much better and more 
successful, the plan of Corporations is ; than either the plan of 
direct home-government, or of deputy governors, or of private 
action and Individual enterprise. If the United States had 
conducted its settlements in the West, on this principle of Cor 
porations, all the blessings of civilization might have been car 
ried steadily forward, with the settlements. Indian wars might 
have been prevented, the Indians themselves absorbed in the 
Corporations ; and by preventing the immediate and irritating 
causes of the Southern Rebellion, that great war itself might 
have been prevented. 

3. Genesis. 

Let us premise here, however, that, even if we fail to show 
the practicability of, or the methods of, producing and culti 
vating Corporations for general political purposes; it would 
still be very premature to suppose, that they never could be 
cultivated or produced : for, perhaps it may not be possible, to 
point out how the combined organizations can be developed, 
until after the Corporations for the various special and ele 
mentary functions before mentioned, shall have been separately 
produced. For, as has been said in the Introduction, the true 
science of society, cannot go very far in advance of the progress 
of the foremost phases of society itself. 

The Corporations that we have already mentioned, would, by 
their variety, and their promotions, have produced the men and 
the methods, from which might be selected the various elements 
to form these Corporations for general administration. Those 
previous ones, should also have produced the wisdom and the 
disposition, for the successful combination of the elements. It 
is scarcely to be expected of this high kind of Corporations, that 


they could be formed, like some that have already been mentioned, 
namely, by the direct combination of pre-existing organizations. 
Perhaps, for this high kind of Corporations, all that can be ex 
pected from the previous ones, is, the men, the dispositions, and 
the ideas. 

It is possible, that sometimes these Corporations might grow 
out of a combination of the developments of Insurance and 
Police, that is to say, Corporations might be entrusted with 
governmental powers, by undertaking to insure the public against 
Individual losses, either from their own errors, or from rogues ; 
and by assuming the expenses and duties of the detection of 
criminals. But of course, to be balanced by leaving their pun 
ishment or treatment, to the organs that should approve them 
selves capable of those separate functions ; and of course, not to 
be judges in their own cases, or even in cases involving similar 

The actual realization of a Corporation of this kind, involving 
as it would, the exercise of combined functions, would require 
and presuppose, that there should be a union of two separate 
organizations ; one of which, should have grown up from a fully 
approved insurance organization, and the other from a fully ap 
proved police Corporation. Then, nearly all that would remain 
to do, would be to get them to combine, in one business or in one 
function. I do not know whether the analogy for this, that is for 
the combination of two organs into one, can be found in physical 
biology. The combination of sex might be compared, but that 
is in reality metaphysical, so far as we yet know. And in meta 
physical objects, we can find other and ample analogies, as of 
ideas and feeling and will, uniting into one mentality. 

The very idea of voluntary governmental Corporations, seems 
to have originated with the religious element of human nature : 
the religions of most countries and of all ages, having sponta 
neously .embodied themselves in organizations tantamount to 

The perception, but misunderstanding of this truth, is what 
has induced some writers, to charge the religious element with 
producing caste, and secret associations, in ancient times. But the 
general principle really budding into existence, could not be un 
derstood until the true theory of Corporations became manifested. 



The Corporations of the Catholic church, in Catholic coun 
tries, developed them pretty fully ; but politico-religious Corpo 
rations of all ages, have been conducted chiefly for the protection 
of religious officials, rather than of the people, excepting, how 
ever, the Catholic "communities" or recluse-houses. Perhaps 
therefore, the religious element of hjiman nature, may develop 
such Corporations, especially when at work in recluse association. 
Either the churches themselves might ultimately receive again, 
as in former ages, a restored power over their own members ; or, 
if it be necessary to retain perpetually the distinction between 
the religious and secular powers, the churches might give rise to 
other Corporations which would exercise such functions, -just 
as they have given rise to their respective Bible, Tract, Mission, 
Hospital, and Poor, S